Oehmen Et Al 2012 - The Guide To Lean Enablers For Managing Engineering Programs

TheGuideto
LeanEnablersfor
ManagingEngineeringPrograms

Publishedbythe
JointMITPMIINCOSECommunityofPracticeonLeaninProgramManagement
Editedby
JosefOehmen,Ph.D.,MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology,LeanAdvancementInitiative

Version1.0
May2012

NOTICES,USEandPERMISSIONS
Copyright2012byMassachusettsInstituteofTechnology,InternationalCouncilforSystemsEngineeringand
ProjectManagementInstitute,Inc.Allrightsreserved.Unauthorizedreproductionofthismaterialisstrictly
prohibited.
TheGuidetoLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms(Guide)waspreparedbyavolunteergroupof
contributingauthorsfromwithinthejointInternationalCouncilonSystemsEngineering(INCOSE),Project
ManagementInstitute(PMI)andMassachusettsInstituteofTechnologyLeanAdvancementInitiative(MITLAI)
CommunityofPractice(theCOP).TheGuideisreleasedthroughthatcollaborativeeffortasTechnicalData.
ItissubjecttochangewithoutnoticeandmaynotbereferredtoasanINCOSETechnicalProduct.
Copyright2011.Allrightsreserved.Unauthorizedreproductionofthismaterialisstrictlyprohibited.Leanfor
SystemsEngineeringwithLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering,byBohdanOppenheim,publishedbyJohn
Wiley&Sons,Inc.MaterialfromLeanforSystemsEngineeringwithLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering
includedinthisguideisusedwiththeexpressauthorizationofJohnWiley&Sonsandremainssolelythe
intellectualpropertyofJohnWiley&SonsandBohdanOppenheim.Requestsforpermissiontoreprint,
republish,copy,createderivativeworksfromoruseforanyotherpurposeshouldbesubmittedusingthe
electronicBookPermissionsrequestformlocatedontheWileywebsiteat
http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id301724.html.
Copyright2011.Allrightsreserved.Unauthorizedreproductionofthismaterialisstrictlyprohibited.INCOSE
SystemsEngineeringHandbook,v.3.2.2,publishedbyInternationalCouncilonSystemsEngineering.Material
fromtheINCOSESystemsEngineeringHandbookincludedinthisguideisusedwiththeexpressauthorizationof
InternationalCouncilonSystemsEngineeringandremainssolelytheintellectualpropertyofInternational
CouncilonSystemsEngineering.Requestsforpermissiontoreprint,republish,copy,createderivativeworks
fromoruseforanyotherpurposeshouldbedirectedto:INCOSECentralOffice,7670OpportunityRoad,Suite
220,SanDiego,CA921112222.
Copyright2012.Allrightsreserved.Unauthorizedreproductionofthismaterialisstrictlyprohibited.The
StandardforProgramManagementThirdEdition,exposuredraftversion,publishedbyProjectManagement
Institute,Inc.MaterialfromTheStandardforProgramManagement,ThirdEdition,exposuredraftversion,
includedinthisguideisusedwiththeexpressauthorizationoftheProjectManagementInstitute,Inc.,and
remainssolelytheintellectualpropertyofProjectManagementInstitute,Inc.Useofthisexposuredraftversion
isnotintendedtoserveasreplacementorsubstituteforthefinalversionofTheStandardforProgram
ManagementThirdEdition.Requestsforpermissiontoreprint,republish,copy,createderivativeworksfrom
oruseforanyotherpurposeshouldbesubmittedusingtheelectronicRightsandUsePermissionsformlocated
ontheProjectManagementInstitute,Inc.,websiteathttp://www.pmi.org/en/FormsPermissions.aspx.
Copyright2011.Allrightsreserved.Unauthorizedreproductionofthismaterialisstrictlyprohibited.Practice
StandardforEarnedValueManagementSecondEdition,publishedbyProjectManagementInstitute,Inc.
MaterialfromPracticeStandardforEarnedValueManagementSecondEdition,includedinthisguideisused
withtheexpressauthorizationofProjectManagementInstitute,Inc.,andremainssolelytheintellectual
propertyofProjectManagementInstitute,Inc.Requestsforpermissiontoreprint,republish,copy,create
derivativeworksfromoruseforanyotherpurposeshouldbesubmittedusingtheelectronicRightsandUse
PermissionsformlocatedontheProjectManagementInstitute,Inc.,websiteathttp://www.pmi.org/en/Forms
Permissions.aspx.
PublishedbytheJointMITPMIINCOSECommunityofPracticeonLeaninProgramManagement
TermsofUse
TheGuideinitsentiretyandwithoutalterationmaybedistributedfollowingdownloadtothirdparties,provided
thatallnoticesofcopyright,ownershipanduseincludedintheGuideremainvisibleandunaltered,and
providedthedistributorreceivesnoremunerationorothercommercialvaluefromthedistributionoftheGuide.
AuthorUse.IndividualparticipantsfromwithintheMITPMIINCOSECommunityofPractice(COP)contributed
asauthorstotheGuide.EachauthoridentifiedassuchintheGuidemayusethematerialthatheorshe
contributedwithoutrestriction,providedthattheauthormaintainsvalidrightstothecontributedmaterials,has
notassignedcopyrighttoorownershipoftheauthorscontributedmaterialstoanotherpartyorhasnot
otherwisetransferredownershipofthatmaterialtoathirdparty.Iftheauthorhasassignedortransferred
copyrightorownershipoftheauthorscontributedmaterialstoanotherparty,theauthormustcomplywiththe
requirementsassociatedwiththatassignmentortransfer.INCOSE,MITandPMIassumenoresponsibilityor
liabilityfortheactionsofindividualauthorswholackvalidownershipinterestinthecontributedmaterialsor
whoactincontraventionofanyassignmentortransferofownershipinthematerials.
CommunityofPracticeUse.MembersoftheCOPmaypreparederivativeworksbasedontheGuidefor
noncommercialorpersonalusebyothermembersoftheCOP.Derivativeworkshallmeananynewwork
whichincorporatesanyportionoftheGuide.InanycasewhereamemberoftheCOPdevelopsaderivative
work,theappropriatecopyrightnoticesastheyappearwithintheGuidemustbeincludedinthederivative
work.IntellectualpropertythatINCOSE,MIT,PMIorJohnWiley&Sonsindividuallyownandhaveidentifiedas
eachoftheirintellectualpropertyintheGuideshallremaintheexclusivepropertyoftheowner.Membersof
theCOPmustrequestpermissiondirectlyfromthepartyclaimingownershipoftheintellectualpropertyinthe
Guidetousethatpropertyinanyreproductions,derivativeworks,products,servicesorofferingsderivedfrom
thosematerials.
ExtractsofMaterialfromtheGuide.ExtractsfromtheGuideforuseinotherworksbythirdpartiesare
permitted,providedtheappropriatecopyrightnoticeandattributionisincludedwithallsuchextractsandany
requiredpermissionshavebeengrantedbytheapplicablecopyrightowner.IntellectualpropertythatINCOSE,
MITorPMIownindividuallyandhaveidentifiedasitsintellectualpropertyintheGuideshallremainthe
exclusivepropertyoftheowner.Usersmustrequestpermissiondirectlyfromthecopyrightownertouseits
intellectualpropertyinanyreproductions,derivativeworks,products,servicesorofferingsderivedfromthose
materials.
AllOtherUses.Creationofcommercialproducts,servicesorotherofferingsderivedfromtheGuideisstrictly
prohibitedwithoutwrittenpermissionfromMIT,INCOSEandPMI.

i
TheGuidetoLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms
Editor
JosefOehmen,PhD,MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology,LeanAdvancementInitiative(LAI),Founderand
academiccochairoftheCoP
Authors
JosefOehmen,PhD,MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology,LeanAdvancementInitiative(LAI)
BohdanBoW.Oppenheim,PhD,LoyolaMarymountUniversity
DeborahSecor,RockwellCollins
EricNorman,Norman&NormanConsulting;ChairofPMIStandardforProgramManagementThirdEdition
EricRebentisch,PhD,MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology,LeanAdvancementInitiative(MITLAI)
JosephA.Sopko,SiemensCorporation
MarcSteuber,MassachusettsInstituteofTechnologyandTechnicalUniversityofMunich
RickDove,StevensInstituteofTechnology
KambizMoghaddam,EdD,TheBoeingCompany
SteveMcNeal,UnitedLaunchAlliance
MarkBowie,TheBoeingCompany,IndustryCoChairoftheCOP
MohamedBenDaya,KingFahdUniversityofPetroleumandMinerals
WolfAltman,Battelle
JohnDriessnack,ManagementConcepts

TheguidesolelyrepresentstheviewsoftheauthorsanddoesnotnecessarilyreflecttheviewsofMITLAI,PMI,
andINCOSE.
Citedas
Oehmen,Josef,(Ed.).2012.TheGuidetoLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms,Version1.0.
Cambridge,MA:JointMITPMIINCOSECommunityofPracticeonLeaninProgramManagement.URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/70495.

Pleasecontactuswithyourfeedback
Wewelcomeyourfeedback.Pleasecontactusthroughourwebsiteathttp://www.leanprogram
management.org/.Theguidewillbecontinuouslydeveloped,andyourfeedbackwillhelpustoimproveitand
makeitmorerelevant.Wearealsoalwayslookingfordedicatedprofessionalstojointhegroupcontactusif
youareinterested.
ii
TABLEOFCONTENTS
UsethisGuideandLeadyourProgramtoExcellence............................................................................v
EXECUTIVESUMMARY........................................................................................................................vi
Acknowledgements............................................................................................................................vii
1
IntroductiontotheGuideonLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms.........................1
1.1
HowtoUseThisGuide.................................................................................................................1
1.1.1
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
Motivation:WhyDoWeNeedLeanEnablers?............................................................................3
TheDevelopmentandValidationProcessoftheLeanEnablers..................................................5
TheImpactofUsingLeanEnablersinEngineeringPrograms......................................................6
ApplicabilityoftheLeanEnablers................................................................................................8
1.5.1
1.5.2
1.5.3
1.6
2
OverviewoftheContent....................................................................................................................1
GettingStartedwiththeLeanEnablers..............................................................................................2
ProgramRolesandApplicationExamplesfortheLeanEnablers.......................................................3
ApplicabilitytoDifferentTypesofPrograms......................................................................................8
ApplicabilitytoDifferentLifeCyclePhasesofEngineeringSystems..................................................9
ApplicabilityofLeanEnablerstotheManagementofEngineeringProjects.....................................9
RelationshiptotheINCOSELeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering.........................................10
LeanThinking:ABriefIntroduction............................................................................................12
2.1
Overview.....................................................................................................................................12
2.2
LeanValueandProgramBenefits..............................................................................................12
2.3
Waste..........................................................................................................................................13
2.4
TheSixLeanPrinciples................................................................................................................13
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3
2.4.4
2.4.5
2.4.6
Principle1:Value..............................................................................................................................14
Principle2:ValueStream.................................................................................................................15
Principle3:Flow...............................................................................................................................15
Principle4:Pull.................................................................................................................................16
Principle5:Perfection......................................................................................................................16
Principle6:RespectforPeople.........................................................................................................17
3
IntegratingProgramManagementandSystemsEngineering......................................................18
3.1
ManagementRolesinSuccessfulEngineeringPrograms...........................................................18
3.2
OverviewofProgramManagement...........................................................................................19
3.3
OverviewofSystemsEngineering..............................................................................................20
3.4
EngineeringProgramStakeholders............................................................................................23
3.5
MeasuringValueinEngineeringPrograms................................................................................25
4
Top10ThemesofChallengesinManagingEngineeringPrograms...............................................28
4.1
Theme1:FirefightingReactiveProgramExecution.................................................................29
4.2
Theme2:Unstable,UnclearandIncompleteRequirements.....................................................29
4.3
Theme3:InsufficientAlignmentandCoordinationoftheExtendedEnterprise.......................29
4.4
Theme4:LocallyOptimizedProcessesthatarenotIntegratedAcrosstheEntireEnterprise..30
4.5
Theme5:UnclearRoles,Responsibilities,andAccountability...................................................30
4.6
Theme6:MismanagementofProgramCulture,TeamCompetency,andKnowledge..............30
4.7
Theme7:InsufficientProgramPlanning....................................................................................31
4.8
Theme8:ImproperMetrics,MetricSystems,andKPIs.............................................................31
4.9
Theme9:LackofProactiveProgramRiskManagement............................................................31
4.10 Theme10:PoorProgramAcquisitionandContractingPractices..............................................31

iii
5
TheLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms..............................................................33
5.1
LeanEnablers1.x:TreatPeopleasYourMostImportantAsset(LeanPrinciple6)...................35
5.2
LeanEnablers2.x:MaximizeProgramValue(LeanPrinciple1).................................................44
5.3
LeanEnablers3.x:OptimizetheValueStream(LeanPrinciple2)..............................................53
5.4
LeanEnablers4.x:CreateProgramFlow(LeanPrinciple3).......................................................68
5.5
LeanEnablers5.x:CreatePullintheProgram(LeanPrinciple4)..............................................81
5.6
LeanEnablers6.x:PursueProgramPerfection(LeanPrinciple5).............................................84
6
ComplementaryApproachestoImprovethePerformanceofEngineeringPrograms..................95
6.1
AgileDevelopment.....................................................................................................................95
6.2
CapabilityMaturityModelIntegration(CMMI).........................................................................98
6.3
EarnedValueManagement(EVM)...........................................................................................103
7
HowtoUsetheLeanEnablersinYourOrganizationSomeSuggestions..................................108
7.1
UsetheLeanEnablerswhenStartingaNewProgram.............................................................108
7.2
GuidingStrategicProgramEnterpriseTransformation............................................................108
7.3
ImprovingEngineeringProgramManagement........................................................................110
8
PotentialBarrierstoImplementingtheLeanEnablers..............................................................113
8.1
PotentialBarriersinGovernmentSponsoredPrograms..........................................................113
8.2
PotentialBarriersinCommercial(andGovernmentSponsored)Programs............................113
8.3
PotentialBarriersinAcademiaandEducation.........................................................................114
Appendix.........................................................................................................................................115
A.1 ComplementaryInformationSources......................................................................................115
A.1.1
A.1.2
A.1.3
A.2
A.3
A.4
A.5
CompleteListofEngineeringProgramChallenges..................................................................120
OverviewofProgramsUsedinValidationandasExamples....................................................125
ReferenceListofLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms.....................................130
MappingofLeanEnablers........................................................................................................142
A.5.1
A.5.2
A.5.3
A.5.4
iv
LeanThinking,LeanProductDevelopmentandLeanSystemsEngineering..................................115
SystemsEngineering.......................................................................................................................116
ProgramManagement...................................................................................................................118
MappingtoProgramManagementChallenges..............................................................................142
MappingtoProgramManagementPerformanceDomains...........................................................164
MappingtoINCOSESystemsEngineeringProcesses......................................................................175
MappingtoLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering(LEfSE)..........................................................190
UsethisGuideandLeadyourProgramtoExcellence
Imaginerunningaprogramthatinspiresyoueveryday:Aprogramwhereeverybodyunderstandshowthey
makeadifferencefortheircustomers,theirinternalorganization,andsocietyatlarge;whereprofessionals
collaborateseamlesslyoverfunctionalandorganizationalboundaries;whereprocessesrunlikeclockwork,
deliveringwhatisneededandwhenitisexpected;Andwhereyourgreatestworryisironingoutafewslight
imperfections.Inshort:ALeanprogram!Youcanrunthisworldclassprogram,andthisguidehasbeenwritten
tohelpyoudothat.
Wehavecometoacceptthatbigprogramsmeanbigproblems,bigbills,andbigdelays.Inaddition,weaccept
thatthereisconstantbickeringbetweenfunctionalsilos;conflictsamongcustomers,contractors,andsuppliers
thatleadtofrequentirritations,animosity,andopenhostility;lawyersandbureaucratsruntheprograms;and
noworkotherthanwritingreportsgetsdone.Conveniently,theexcusesfordoingsoareendless(e.g.,notime
formanagingtheprogrambetterbecauseeveryoneisbusyfixingproblems,requirementschangeallthetime,
regulationsandcompliancereplaceefficiency,newtechnologiesfail,suppliersdonotsticktotheirpromises,
andqualifiedpeopleareimpossibletofind).
Thisguidehasbeenwrittenformanagersandengineerswhoarewillingtotakeonthechallengetoleadtheir
programtoexcellence.
Inthe1940s,thethreeknowledgedomainsofoperationsresearch,systemsengineering,andproject
managementemergedtoallowtheexecutionofthefirsttrulylargescaleandcomplextechnologyand
engineeringprograms.Now,70yearslater,theLeanAdvancementInitiative(LAI)attheMassachusettsInstitute
ofTechnology(MIT),ProjectManagementInstitute(PMI),andInternationalCouncilonSystemsEngineering
(INCOSE)joinedforcestoformagroupofsubjectmatterexpertstodistillandintegratethebestideasand
practicesfromthoseareasandaddresstodayschallenges.
Overthelastyear,thisgroupofsubjectmatterexpertsfromindustry,academia,andgovernmentidentifiedand
prioritizedthetopchallengesthatengineeringprogramsfacetoday,andconsolidatedtheminto10major
themes(Section4).GuidedbytheLeanThinkingphilosophy(introducedinSection2),thegroupidentifiedand
extensivelyvalidatedapproximately300bestpracticesin40categoriestoaddressthesechallenges,drawingon
bothprogrammanagementandsystemsengineering.TheresultistheLeanEnablersforManagingEngineering
Programs(Section5).
ThebiggesttransformationjourneystartswithasinglesteptakingjustoneofourLeanEnablerscanmakea
difference(see6.2.6onStartSmallbySelectingtheMostBeneficialLeanEnablersforYourprogram.).We
encourageyoutobeginbyreviewingourgoodsenserecommendationsinSection5,picktwoorthree,andturn
themintocommonsensepracticesinyourprogram(Section7alsodiscussesmoreformalchangemanagement
approaches).
Successfulprogramsprovethatitcanbedoneandyoucandoitinyourprogramtoo!
JosefOehmen,PhD
May2012,Cambridge,MA(USA)
v
ExecutiveSummary
ThisguideprovidesthefindingsoftheJointMITPMIINCOSELeaninProgramManagementCommunityof
Practicethatarebasedona1yearprojectexecutedduring2011and2012.Thecommunitywasmadeupof
selectedsubjectmatterexpertsfromindustry,government,andacademia.Thefindingsreportedinthisguide
arebasedonknownbestpracticesfromtheliterature,programexperienceofthesubjectmatterexperts,and
inputfromanextensivecommunityofprofessionals.
ThefindingsoftheJointCommunityofPracticewereextensivelyvalidatedthroughcommunityandpractitioner
feedback,multipleworkshopsatINCOSEandPMIconferences,LAIhostedwebbasedmeetings,andsurveysof
theextendedprofessionalcommunity.ThesurveyresultsclearlyshowthatprogramsthatusetheLean
Enablersshowasignificantlystrongerperformanceinalldimensionsfromcost,toscheduleandquality,as
wellasstakeholdersatisfaction.
Thecoreofthisdocumentcontains(1)the10themesformajorengineeringprogrammanagementchallenges,
and(2)the43LeanEnablerswith286subenablerstoovercomethesechallenges,betterintegrateprogram
managementandsystemsengineering,andleadengineeringprogramstoexcellence.
ThemainengineeringprogrammanagementchallengesthatwereidentifiedandaddressedByLeanEnablersin
thisguidearereportedindetailinSection4andsummarizedasfollows:
Major Challenge Themes in Engineering Programs that

Lean Enablers Help to Address
1.FirefightingReactiveprogramexecution
2.Unstable,unclear,andincompleterequirements
3.Insufficientalignmentandcoordinationoftheextendedenterprise
4.Processesarelocallyoptimizedandnotintegratedfortheentireenterprise
5.Unclearroles,responsibilities,andaccountability
6.Mismanagementofprogramculture,teamcompetency,andknowledge
7.Insufficientprogramplanning
8.Impropermetrics,metricsystems,andKPIs
9.Lackofproactiveprogramriskmanagement
10.Poorprogramacquisitionandcontractingpractices
TheLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringProgramsactionablebestpracticescanbefoundinSection5
andaresummarizedasfollows:
Lean Enablers (LE) Structured Along
Six Lean Principles (LP)
vi
No. of Lean
Enablers
No. of
Subenablers
Page
LE1.x:Respectthepeopleinyourprogram(LP6)
6
38
35
LE2.x:Capturethevaluedefinedbythekeycustomerstakeholders(LP1)
6
44
46
LE3.x:Mapthevaluestreamandeliminatewaste(LP2)
11
75
53
LE4.x:Flowtheworkthroughplannedandstreamlinedprocesses(LP3)
10
64
68
LE5.x:Letcustomerstakeholderspullvalue(LP4)
2
10
81
LE6.x:Pursueperfectioninallprocesses(LP5)
8
55
84
Total
43
286
Acknowledgements
TheresearchthatunderliesthisguidewasexecutedbytheJointMITPMIINCOSECommunityofPracticeon
LeaninProgramManagementbetweenJanuary2011andMarch2012.Thegroupstartedthroughconversations
withMITLAImembers.Itconsistsofacoregroupofsubjectmatterexpertswhometweeklytodevelopthe
content,aswellasanextendedprofessionalcommunityrepresentingindustry,government,andacademiawith
140membersfrommorethan80organizations.Thecoresubjectmatterexpertsareasfollows:
Name
Title
Affiliation
MarkBowie
LeanStrategist
BoeingDefense,Space&Security
IndustryCoChairoftheGroup
JimDavis
SolutionManager,Aerospace&
DefenseIndustry
SAPLabs
RolandL.Frenck
OfficeofAcquisitionandProject
Management
U.S.NationalNuclearSecurity
Administration
MilenKutev
SeniorProjectManager
BCAACanada
StevenMcNeal
ULALeadContinuous
Improvement
UnitedLaunchAlliance
Kambiz(Kami)Moghaddam,EdD
ProgramManagementLean
ExecutionLeader
BoeingMilitaryAircraft
EricS.Norman
CommitteeChair,ThePMI
StandardforProgram
ManagementThirdEdition
Norman&NormanConsulting,LLC
JosefOehmen,PhD
ResearchScientist
MassachusettsInstituteof
Technology,FounderandAcademic
CoChairoftheCoP
Bohdan(Bo)W.Oppenheim,PhD
ProfessorofSystemsEngineering
LoyolaMarymountUniversity
INCOSELeanSEWorkingGroup
DeborahSecor
Engineering&Technology
PrincipalProjectManager;
RockwellCollinsLeanAdvisory
Council
RockwellCollins
INCOSELeanSEWorkingGroup
JosephA.Sopko
SeniorConsultant,Corporate
Research&Technology
SiemensCorporation
J.RobertWirthlin,PhD
AssistantProfessorof
EngineeringSystems
TheAirForceInstituteof
Technology
PeerReviewers
Theauthorsaregratefultoallthepeerreviewersfortheextensiveandinsightfulfeedbackonvariousdraftsof
thisguidefrommanyofourcolleagues.Inparticular,wewouldliketoacknowledgethefollowingpeer
reviewers,inalphabeticorder(theresponsibilityforthecontentandallerrorsremainssolelywiththeauthors):
JanainaCosta,QuocDo,DenizEralp,RobertoFollador,RolandFrenck,BobKenley,JuanEstebanMontero,Adam
Naramore,GeorgeRebovich,JeanClaudeRoussel,AviShtub,JeromeSobetski,MichelThiry,StephenTownsend,
QuynhWoodward,RichardWray,LoriZipes,andJohnZlockie.
vii
SupportingOrganizations
TheauthorsandsubjectmatterexpertsgratefullyacknowledgethesupportfromPMIandINCOSE,including
INCOSEsLeanSystemsEngineeringWorkingGroup,forprovidingaccesstotheirnetworkofexperts,aswellas
theopportunitiestoholdlargeworkshopsattheirconferences.WethankMITsLeanAdvancementInitiative
(MITLAI)anditsconsortiummembersfortheinitialintellectualsparkandseedgroupofsubjectmatterexperts,
aswellasprovidingcriticalfundingfortheMITresearchers.WealsothanktheCenterforCleanWaterandClean
EnergyatMITandKFUPMforadditionalsupportregardingtheriskmanagementcomponentsofthisworkunder
projectnumberR11DMN09.Wethanktheemployersofoursubjectmatterexperts(halfofwhomrepresent
MITLAImemberorganizations)fortheirsupporttomakeparticipationinthiseffortpossible.Weareparticularly
thankfultothe140membersoftheextendedMITPMIINCOSELeaninProgramManagementCommunityof
Practice,aswellasthenumeroussurveyrespondents,forpatientlyworkingwithusformorethanayearand
continuouslyprovidingfeedbacktous.
WealsogratefullyacknowledgeWileyforitskindpermissiontoadaptanexcerptofBohdanOppenheimsbook
LeanforSystemsEngineeringfortheintroductionsectiontoLeanThinkinginthisguide.Wealsoacknowledge
theProjectManagementInstituteforadaptingcontentfromTheStandardforProgramManagementThird
Edition(exposuredraftversion)forthisprojectaswellastheuseofPMIsProjectoftheYearAwardrecipients
casestudiestodemonstratetheapplicationoftheleanenablerscontainedinthisguide.
viii
1
IntroductiontotheGuideonLeanEnablersforManagingEngineering
Programs
1.1
HowtoUseThisGuide
1.1.1 OverviewoftheContent
Thepurposeofthisdocumentistoprovidesuggestionsformanagersandengineerswhowanttoimprovethe
performanceoftheirprograms.Theauthorsjointlycollectedandsynthesizeddatatoprovidethebestavailable
guidanceonhowtoleadengineeringprogramstoexcellence.
Westronglyrecommendreadingtheentireguidetogetanoverviewofthemultifacetedchallengesand
solutionsthatitcontains.ThecasualreadermayrefertoTable1asaguidetothemostrelevantsectionsfor
theirinterest.
Table1:QuickReadingGuide
Section
Topics of Interest
Overview of Lean
in Program
Management
Integrating
Systems
Engineering and
Program
Management
Checklist of
Program Risks
Checklist of
Program
Improvement
Opportunities
Structured
Improvement
Suggestions
1.Introduction
z
z
z
2.LeanThinking
z
z
3.IntegratingProgram
Managementand
SystemsEngineering
z
z
4.Top10Challenges
z
z
z
z
z
z
6.Complementary
Approaches
z
z
7.Implementation
Suggestions
z
8.PossibleBarriersto
Implementation
z
5.LeanEnablers
Section1(thissection)discussesthecontextofthedocument.Thisincludesthemotivationfordevelopingthis
guide,developmentprocess,applicabilityoftherecommendations(beyondengineeringprograms,toprojects,
anddifferentlifecyclephases),aswellastherelationshiptotheINCOSELeanEnablersforSystems
Engineering.
Section2introducestheconceptofLeanThinking.ItdiscussestherelationshipofLeanvalueandprogram
benefits,outlinesthetypesofprogrammanagementwaste,andintroducesthesixLeanprinciplesthatareused
todevelopandstructuretheenablersforengineeringprograms.
Section3summarizesthekeyconceptsanddefinesthemaintermsforbetterintegratingprogrammanagement
andsystemengineering.Itbrieflydiscussestherolesofprogrammanagerandsystemengineer,introducesthe
twodomainsofprogrammanagementandsystemengineering,discussesthetypesofprogramstakeholders,
andsummarizesaframeworkusedtomeasurevalueandbenefitsinprograms.
1
LeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms
Section4containsthemajorengineeringprogrammanagementchallengesthatwereidentifiedduringthe
collaborationproject.Theyarepresentedin10maincategories:(1)firefightingreactiveprogramexecution;(2)
unstable,unclearandincompleterequirements;(3)insufficientalignmentandcoordinationoftheextended
enterprise;(4)processesarelocallyoptimized,notintegratedfortheentireenterprise;(5)unclearroles,
responsibilities,andaccountability;(6)mismanagementofprogramculture,teamcompetencyandknowledge;
(7)insufficientprogramplanning;(8)impropermetrics,metricsystems,andKPIs;(9)lackofproactiveprogram
riskmanagement;and(10)poorprogramacquisitionandcontractingpractices.
Section5describesthecorrespondingLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms.Thesectioncontains
allofthe329Leanpracticesforimprovingprogramperformance(43LeanEnablers(LE)with286subenablers).
Theyarestructuredalongthe6LeanPrinciples(LP):LE1.x:Respectthepeopleinyourprogram(LP6);LE2.x:
Capturethevaluedefinedbythekeycustomerstakeholders(LP1);LE3.x:Mapthevaluestreamandeliminate
waste(LP2);LE4.x:Flowtheworkthroughplannedandstreamlinedprocesses(LP3);LE5.x:Letcustomer
stakeholderspullvalue(LP4);andLE6.x:Pursueperfectioninallprocesses(LP5).
Section6highlightstherelationshipoftheLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringProgramstoother
complementaryviewsandimprovementapproaches.TheyincludeAgileDevelopment,CapabilityMaturity
ModelIntegration(CMMI),andEarnedValueManagement.
Section7givessomeconcreteadviceonhowtoimplementtheLeanEnablers.Itcoversstrategicprogram
enterprisetransformationefforts,programsthatarebeingnewlystarted,andcontinuousimprovementof
existingprograms.
Section8highlightsseveralbarrierstotheuseoftheLeanEnablersinthecurrentprogramenvironment.It
summarizesthestructuralandstrategicissuesinthegovernmentandthecorporateandacademicspheresthat
needtobeaddressedtomakeiteasierforprogrammanagersandsystemsengineerstoleadtheirprogramto
excellence.
TheAppendixcontainsreferencestootherhelpfuldocuments,thecompletelistofprogrammanagement
challenges,anoverviewoftheprogramsusedinthecontentanalysistovalidatetheLeanEnablers,areference
listtotheLeanEnablers,andanumberofdetailedmappingsoftheEnablers(totheProgramManagement
PerformanceDomains,totheprogrammanagementchallenges,the26INCOSEandISO/IEC15288Systems
Engineeringprocesses,andtheLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering).
1.1.2 GettingStartedwiththeLeanEnablers
Thebestpracticesformanagingengineeringprograms,whichhavebeencondensedintotheLeanEnablers,are
basicallygoodsense.Itisexpectedthatthisguidewillcontributetomakingthemcommonsenseaswell.
TheLeanThinkingphilosophywasusedastheframeworktoidentifythosebestpracticesthataddvalueto
programmanagementandsystemsengineering,aswellasthosepracticesthathavetheabilitytointegratethe
twodomainsacrossallfunctionalandorganizationalboundaries.Leanexcelsatthisandwasthereforeanatural
choice.Leandoesnotcontradictotherimprovementapproaches,providedthattheytoofocusondelivering
morevalueforthecustomerstakeholdersthebuyersandusers.Forexample,inSection6.1,webrieflydiscuss
thecomplementaryrelationshiptotheAgileapproach.
Itisnotnecessary(oradvisable)toimplementallLeanEnablersatonce.LeanEnabler6.2.6states:Startsmall
byselectingthemostbeneficialLeanEnablersforyourprogram.And6.1.2says:Focusonachievingthe
programbenefitswhenselecting,customizing,andimplementingprogrammanagementstandards,guidelines,
andmaturitymodels.Thisadvicealsoappliestotheseguidelines.Clearlyprioritizetheimprovementneedsfor
yourprogrambasedonthe10majorchallengesdiscussedinthisguide.ThenselectthoseLeanEnablersfor
implementationwhichpromisethehighestlevelofimprovementfortheimplementationeffort.
2
Thisguidecontainsanumberofmappingstoassistinidentifyingtheenablersthataremostrelevantforyour
program:
x
x
x
x
x
x
MappingofLeanEnablersagainstengineeringprogramchallenges(Section5andSectionA.5.1)
MappingofLeanEnablersagainstprogrammanagementperformancedomains(Section5andSection
A.5.2)
MappingofLeanEnablersagainsttheINCOSESystemsEngineeringProcesses(Section5andSection
A.5.3)andtheLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering(SectionA.5.4)
HighlevelmappingofLeanEnablersagainstAgileDevelopment(Section6.1)
HighlevelmappingofLeanEnablersagainsttheCapabilityMaturityModelIntegration(CMMI)(Section
6.2)
HighlevelmappingofLeanEnablersagainstEarnedValueManagement(EVM)(Section6.3)
1.1.3 ProgramRolesandApplicationExamplesfortheLeanEnablers
Thisguideprovidesvaluableinsightsforanumberofdifferentstakeholdersinanengineeringprogramas
follows:
x
x
x
x
x
Programmanagers:Tailormanagementapproachandprocesseswhenprioritizingandimplementing
LeanEnablers.
Functionalmanagers:Designtheinterfacebetweenfunctionaldomains(andtheirmanagement)and
programmanagementbyimplementingthecorrespondingLeanEnablers,forexample,project
management,productdevelopment,engineeringandsystemsengineering,corporateleadership,
marketing,andsupplychainmanagement,etc.
Continuousimprovementandauditingfunctions:Updateexistingguidelinesandchecklistsordesign
processimprovementworkshopsusingtheLeanEnablers.
Riskmanagers:Identifyprogramrisksusingtheengineeringprogrammanagementchallengesasa
checklistanddevelopmitigationactionsusingcorrespondingLeanEnablers.
Customerandgovernmentperspective:Evolveandmaturerequirementswiththeassistanceofthe
enablersrelatingtocustomerstakeholders.Defineexpectationsandrulesforcommunicationand
interactionswithcontractorsandsuppliersusingsimilarenablers.
Corporateleadership:ApplytheLeanEnablerstocorporatetransformationandimprovementprograms
andusethemtohelpdesigninternalbestpracticestandardsforincreasingtheefficiencyand
effectivenessofengineeringprograms.
Allprofessionalsinanengineeringprogram:Applytherecommendationsinthisguidetoallfacetsof
programmanagementandbenefitbyincreasingknowledgeimprovingworkperformance,and
enhancingthegrowthofyoucareer.
AmoredetaileddiscussionontheimplementationoftheLeanEnablersiscontainedinSection7.
1.2
Motivation:WhyDoWeNeedLeanEnablers?
Takingonlargescaleengineeringprogramsisoneofthemostdifficult,risky,andwhendonewellrewarding
undertakingagovernmentorcompanycanattempt.Itnotonlypushestheenvelopeofwhatispossible,but
definesanewenvelope.Itgeneratescapabilities,technologies,products,andsystemsthatareinnovativeand
unique,andgeneratestremendoussocietalbenefitsfromhybridcarstoatriptothemoon,fromroad
networkstoGPSnavigation,andfromcarbonneutralelectricitysourcestothesmartcity.
3
Ontheotherhand,largescaleengineeringprogramspresentformidablechallenges.Asanexample,letus
considertheU.S.DepartmentofDefenseengineeringdevelopmentprograms(mainlybecausedetailedcostand
performancedataarefreelyavailable1;reportsoflargescalecivilengineeringprogramsprovidesimilar
information.2Theaccumulatedcostoverrunofthelargest96engineeringprogramshasreachednearly$300
billion,astaggeringamount,andtheaveragescheduleoverruniscloseto2years(seeFigure1).Clearly,both
costandscheduleunderperformancearenotsustainable.So,whatarethemajorchallengesintheselargescale
engineeringprogramsandhowcanwecounterthem?

Figure1:Engineeringprogramsareplaguedbysignificantcostoverruns.
Inthe1940s,theexecutionofengineeringprogramsofthisscaleandcomplexitywerecomprisedofthree
disciplines:operationsresearch,projectandprogrammanagement,andsystemsengineering.3Inthelast70
years,therehavebeenmajoradvancementsineachofthesedisciplines.Thereareanimpressivenumberof
books,magazines,andjournalsoneachdiscipline;therearenumerousmastersdegreeprogramsforeach
discipline,andtherearevariousprofessionalsocietiesdedicatedtothecontinuousdevelopmentofthese
disciplines.However,thereisnosinglesourceforinformationthatcombinestheknowledgefromallthree
fields.TheJointCommunityofPracticesetouttoclosethisgapandintegratetheexpertisefromthethreefields
(seeFigure2).UsingtheoperationsmanagementtheoryofLeanThinking,programmanagementandsystems
engineeringareintegratedwithittodevelopasetofunique,relevant,andactionablerecommendationsfor
programmanagersTheLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms.

1
UnitedStatesGovernmentAccountabilityOffice:AssessmentsofSelectedWeaponPrograms.ReporttoCongressionalCommittees.
GAO09326SP.2009
2
Cantarellietal.:Costoverrunsinlargescaletransportationinfrastructureprojects:Explanationsandtheirtheoreticalembeddedness.
EuropeanJournalofTransportandInfrastructureResearch,2010,Issue10,No.1,pp.518.
3
Ahighlyinterestingandreadablehistoryandbackgroundtothisstudyis:Johnson,StephenB.1997.ThreeApproachestoBig
Technology:OperationsResearch,SystemsEngineering,andProjectManagement,TechnologyandCulture38(4):891919.
4

Figure2:Thethreefoundationsofthisguide.
TheapplicationoftheLeanEnablersallowsyouto:
x
x
x
x
x
Setyourselfupforsuccessbycreatingaprogramculturewithhighlydedicatedandmotivated
professionals.
Focusaprogramondeliveringthevalueandbenefitsthatwilldelightyourcustomerstakeholders.
Eliminateallwastefromyourprogramandminimizenecessary,nonvalueaddedactivities.
Createseamlessintegrationbetweenprocessstepsandintegration,leadingtoprocessflowand
customerpull.
Institutionalizeexcellencebyconstantlystrivingtoimproveandperfectthedeliveryofvalueto
customerstakeholders.
ManyoftheLeanEnablerswillnotbesurprisingornoveltoyouasyoureadthem,becausetheyareallgood
sense.Letsturnthemintocommonsenseaswell!
1.3
TheDevelopmentandValidationProcessoftheLeanEnablers
Fromthebeginning,thedevelopmentoftheLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringProgramswasdrivenby
threeprinciples:
x
x
x
Ensurethehighestlevelofapplicabilityoftheresultstoindustryandgovernmentprogrammanagement
practitioners.
OperateasajointMITPMIINCOSEworkinggrouptounitethebestofleanmanagement,program
management,andsystemsengineering.
Bringtogethersubjectmatterexpertsfromindustry,government,andacademia.
Tothisend,thegroupexecutedthefollowingdevelopmentandvalidationactivities:
x
Thecontentofthisguidewasdevelopedduringa1yearprojectbyagroupofsubjectmatterexperts
fromindustry,government,andacademia(seepagevii),withweeklyprojectmeetingsthatwere
moderatedbyMITLAI.
TheprogrammanagementchallengesandLeanEnablersincorporateboththepracticalexperienceof
thesubjectmatterexperts,aswellasthelatestknowledgefromacademicliteratureonengineering
programmanagement4.
Foranoverviewofthecurrentliterature,pleasesee:Oehmen,J.etal.:ProgramManagementforLargeScaleEngineeringPrograms.
MITLAIWhitepaperSeriesLeanProductDevelopmentforPractitioners.MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology,2011.Availableat
http://lean.mit.edu;Kinscher,K.:IdentificationofLeanEnablersforProgramManagement.Mastersthesis,MassachusettsInstituteof
TechnologyandRWTHAachen,2011.Availableathttp://lean.mit.edu;Steuber,M.:SuccessCriteriaandEnablerforEngineering
Programs.Mastersthesis,MassachusettsInstituteofTechnologyandTUMunich,2012.Availableathttp://lean.mit.edu;and
Oppenheim,B.:LeanforSystemsEngineeringwithLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering.Wiley,2011.
5
x
x
Eachmonth,findingsandprogresswerereportedtothelargerJointCommunityofPracticewhichgrew
to140practitioners,andtheirfeedbackguidedthedevelopmentprocess.
Fourworkshopswereorganizedduringtheyear(onethroughMIT,twoatINCOSEconferences,andone
atthePMIGlobalCongress)toengageincustomerandstakeholderdialogueandelicitfeedbackfrom
morethan180participants.
Twosurveysofindustryandgovernmentpractitionersvalidatedthefindingsofthegroupswork:one
prioritizedtheprogrammanagementchallenges,andtheothervalidatedthesuggestedLeanEnablers
forManagingEngineeringPrograms.
TheLeanEnablerswerevalidatedfurtherbycomparingtheserecommendationswiththemanagement
practicesofhighlysuccessfulprograms(seeSectionA.3intheAppendixforalistoftheprograms).
Thecoreresultsoftheseactivitiesarethethemesformajorprogrammanagementchallengesreportedin
Section4,aswellastheLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringProgramsreportedinSection5.Additional
insightsoftheprojectarecapturedinSection3,discussingvariousaspectsoftheintegrationofprogram
managementandsystemsengineering.Section6containsadiscussion(andmapping)tootherapproachesfor
improvingtheperformanceofengineeringprograms,whileSection7discussesanumberofimplementation
suggestions.Section8concludestheguidewiththesummaryofanumberofpolicybarriersthatstandinthe
wayoftheLeanEnablers.
WhilethesubjectmatterexpertsaresomewhatU.S.centric,strongattemptsweremadetoincorporateaglobal
perspectivethroughtheextendedJointCommunityofPracticeandtheinternationalworkshopswherethe
resultswerediscussed.
1.4
TheImpactofUsingLeanEnablersinEngineeringPrograms5
Duringthefirstphaseofthevalidation,theextenttowhichbestinclassprograms(seeSectionA.3)employed
thesuggestedLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringProgramswasanalyzed.Thisanalysisincludedpublished
programdocumentation,studies,andapplicationmaterialsubmittedtoPMIforitsProjectoftheYearAward.
Thethreemosthighlysuccessfulprogramswheredetailedinformationwasavailableusedbetween60and75%
oftherecommendedenablers,whichwasaveryencouragingresult.Eveninthoseprogramswhereonlybrief
documentationwaspubliclyavailable,wefoundevidencethattheprogramsusedapproximately30%ofthe
enablers.
Wealsofoundthatallenablerswereusedatleastonce,andsomeweremorepopularthanothers.Someofthe
mostfrequentlyusedenablerswere:
x
x
x
x
x
Buildaprogramculturebasedonrespectforpeople(LeanEnabler1.1).
Frequentlyengagethestakeholdersthroughouttheprogramlifecycle(LeanEnabler2.3).
DevelopaCommunicationsPlan(LeanEnabler3.11).
Foreveryprogram,useaprogrammanagerroletoleadandintegratetheprogramfromstarttofinish
(LeanEnabler4.3).
Proactivelymanageuncertaintyandrisktomaximizetheprogrambenefit(LeanEnabler6.6).
Thisrelativelyroughanalysiswasfollowedupwithadetailedsurveyontheperformanceofsuccessfuland
unsuccessfulprograms,aswellasthedegreetowhichtheyusetheLeanEnablers.Figure3showsthesignificant
differenceinperformancebetweenprogramsconsideredtobesuccessfulandthoseconsideredtobe
unsuccessful.Notsurprisingly,successfulprogramsonaverageoverachievedinallperformancedimensions,
whereasunsuccessfulprogramsfellsignificantlyshort.

5
Foradditionaldetailsonthevalidationstudies,pleasereferto:Steuber,M.:SuccessCriteriaandEnablerforEngineeringPrograms.
Mastersthesis,MassachusettsInstituteofTechnologyandTUMunich,2012.Availableathttp://lean.mit.edu.
6

Figure3:Successfulprogramsshowsignificantlyhigherperformancethanunsuccessfulprograms(Steuber2012).
Oneobviousquestionis:DothesuccessfulprogramsusemoreoftheLeanEnablersmoreregularly?Figure4
summarizesthestrongsurveyresults:Acrosstheboard,successfulprogramsareaheadinusingtheLean
Enablers,andthesearepresentedingreaterdetailinSection5.
7

Figure4:Successfulprogramsmakebetteruseofleanenablers(Steuber2012).
1.5
ApplicabilityoftheLeanEnablers
1.5.1 ApplicabilitytoDifferentTypesofPrograms
LeanThinkingaimstocreatethebestvaluefortheprogramstakeholders,withminimumwasteandina
minimumoftime.Thisiscommontoalltypesofprograms:commercialandgovernment,engineeringandsocial
transformation,largeandsmall.TheLeanEnablerspresentedinthisguideweredevelopedfromthechallenges
observedinrecentlargescaleengineeringprograms,requiringmillionstoseveralbillionsofdollars,which
includedaerospaceanddefenseprograms,systemsormissions,largescaleinfrastructuredevelopments,
developmentandintegrationofcomplexITsystems,anddevelopmentofnewcommercialproductlines.Most
oftheprogramsstudiedwereultimatelycontractedbyagovernmentcustomer;thereforethechallengesmay
beindicativeofthesetypesofprograms.Governmentandcommercialprogramsplacedifferentimportanceon
thechallengesand,therefore,ontheresultantenablers.However,thisdifferenceisbelievedtobelargelya
matterofpriorityandnotfundamentalapplicability.
Thegroupofexpertswhodevelopedtheenablersmadeasignificantefforttoensurethattheenablerswere
applicabletoothertypesofprograms,forexample,organizationalchangeprograms(i.e.,costreduction,
restructuring,postmergerintegrations,etc.),andsocialtransformationprograms(i.e.,reducingchildhood
obesityorpreventingandtreatingposttraumaticstressdisorder).Largescaleengineeringprogramsareusually
largescalesociotechnicalprogramsduetothesignificantinfluencetheyexert(e.g.,redefiningtheway
companiesoftheprogramenterpriseworktogether,openingnewproductionandservicefacilities,improving
thequalityoflifeofitsusers,etc.).Itthenbecomesclearwhytheenablerspresentedherealsoapplyto
importantaspectsoforganizationalandsocialtransformationprograms.Amoredetaileddiscussionofdifferent
programtypescanbefoundinthegeneralprogrammanagementliteraturediscussedinSectionA.1.3.
8
1.5.2 ApplicabilitytoDifferentLifeCyclePhasesofEngineeringSystems
TheapplicabilityoftheLeanEnablerstomanagingandimprovingengineeringprogramsrisesandfallswiththe
systemsengineeringcontentoftheprograms6.WhileseveralaspectsoftheLeanEnablersareapplicable
throughouttheentirelifecycleofanengineeringsystem,allofthemapplytotheearlyphasesofconcept
generationanddevelopment(seeFigure5).

Figure5:Lifecyclephasesofanengineeringsystemandapplicabilityofleanenablers.
TheoverallgoaloftheLeanEnablersintheearlyphasesistofocustheprogramonachievingthemaximum
overalllifecyclebenefitsforthecustomerstakeholdersnottolocallyoptimizeanyparticularlifecyclephaseor
anyparticularstagegate.
WhileallLeanEnablersrelatingtoLeanPrinciples6,3,and5applytoalllifecyclephases,someoftheenablers
addressingLeanPrinciples1,2,and4arespecifictotheconceptgenerationanddevelopmentphases(seeTable
2).
Table2:ApplicabilityofLeanEnablersinSystemLifeCyclePhases
Lean Enablers grouped by Lean
Principles
LE1.x:Respectthepeopleinyour
program
LE2.x:Capturethevaluedefinedby
thekeycustomerstakeholders
LE3.x:Mapthevaluestreamand
eliminatewaste
LE4.x:Flowtheworkthrough
plannedandstreamlinedprocesses
LE5.x:Letcustomerstakeholders
pullvalue
LE6.x:Pursueperfectioninall
processes
Concept
Development
Production
Utilization
and Support
Retirement
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
~
~
~
z
z
~
~
~
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
~
~
~
z
z
z
z
z
z Allenablersapply ~ Someenablersdonot apply
1.5.3 ApplicabilityofLeanEnablerstotheManagementofEngineeringProjects
Asignificantfractionoftheenablersisalsoapplicabletothemanagementofengineeringprojects,underthe
followingcircumstances:

6
SeeINCOSESystemsEngineeringHandbook,v.3.2.2,October2011,chapter3foradetaileddiscussionofthelifecyclephasesofan
engineeringsystemandtheroleofsystemsengineering.
9
1.
2.
3.
1.6
AlloftheEnablersapplytoaproject,iftheprojectisaprogram.Thereisasignificantvarianceinthe
perceptionanduseofthetermsprojectsandprogramsinbothindustryandgovernment.Inthisguide,
thedifferencebetweenprojectmanagementandprogrammanagementisbasedonPMIsstandard
definitions.ProgrammanagementworkisdescribedindetailinPMIsTheStandardforProgram
ManagementThirdEditionwhichwillbepublishedinthecomingmonths.Itisalignedwithalarge
scaleRoleDelineationStudyconductedbyPMIin2010thatisdocumentedandpublishedaspartof
PMIsProgramManagementProfessional(PgMP)ExamContentOutline7.Theexamcontentoutline
clearlydescribestheworkintermsofdomains,tasks,skills,knowledgeandcompetenciesthatsets
programsandtherolesofprogrammanagersapartfromprojectsandprojectmanagers.Weintroduce
ourdefinitionofprogramsinSection3.2.Ifaprojectalignswiththisdefinitionofprograms,allenablers
apply.
Iftheprojectincludestheexecutionofprogramlevelactivities,thecorrespondingenablersapplyto
theprogram.Someorganizationsdonothaveaprogrammanagementorganization,sothatprojects
includemostoralloftheprogrammanagementfunctionsaswell.Manyprogramsstartoutasprojects
andevolveintoprogramsduringtheirexecution.Ifaprogramexecutesactivitiesthatfallwithinanyof
thefiveProgramManagementPerformanceDomains,thecorrespondingenablersapplytoyourproject
aswell.Theperformancedomainsare(1)ProgramStrategyAlignment,(2)ProgramBenefits
Management,(3)ProgramStakeholderEngagement,(4)ProgramGovernance,and(5)ProgramLife
CycleManagement(seeSection3.2foramoredetaileddiscussion).AlloftheenablersinSection5are
mappedagainsttheseProgramManagementPerformanceDomains,sothedomainsthatarerelevantto
aspecificprojectcanbeeasilyidentified(seealsoSectionA.5.2intheAppendix).
Theenablersaddressdependenciesandinterfacesbetweenprojectsandprograms.Manyprograms
sufferfromalackofdefinedboundaries,poorintegrationofprocessesandbenefits,andno
coordinationoftheprojectswithintheprogram.TheLeanEnablershelpbothprogrammanagersand
projectmanagerstoidentifyandproperlydefineboundariestoenableintegrationacrossthese
interfacesandcoordinationofmutualresponsibilities.Therefore,theenablerscanserveasastarting
pointforastructuredreviewandoptimizationoftheintegrationbetweentheprojectswithinthe
programandtheprogramitself,aswellasbetweentheprojectswithinoneprogram.Inparticular,all
LeanEnablersaddressingtheProgramLifeCycleManagementperformancedomainhaveadirect
impactonprojects.
RelationshiptotheINCOSELeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering
TheINCOSELeanSystemsEngineeringWorkingGroup8firstpublishedtheLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering
undertheleadershipofBohdanOppenheimandDeborahSecorin2009.9Theresultsformedanimportantinput
fortheworkofthejointMITPMIINCOSECommunityofPracticeonLeaninProgramManagement,which
developedtheLeanEnablersformanagingengineeringprogramsdescribedinthisguide.
Allofthe147enablerspublishedastheLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineeringwereintegratedintothe329
enablersreportedinthisdocument.Minoreditswereappliedtomaketheformulationsapplicabletoboth
programmanagementandsystemsengineering.ThisworkwasoverseenbyBohdanOppenheimandDeborah
SecorwhoservedassubjectmatterexpertsindevelopingtheLeanEnablersformanagingengineering
programs.AdetailedmappingcanbefoundintheAppendixinSectionA.5.4.

7
TheProjectManagementInstitute:TheProgramManagementProfessional(PgMP)ExamContentOutline.NewtownSquare,PA,2010.
WebpageoftheINCOSELeanSystemsEngineeringWorkingGroup:
http://cse.lmu.edu/about/graduateeducation/systemsengineering/INCOSE.htm
9
Oppenheim,B.,Murman,E.,Secor,D.:LeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering.SystemsEngineering,vol14,is1,pp.2955,2011
8
10
TheLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineeringreceivedthe2011ShingoAwardforOperationalExcellenceandthe
2010INCOSEProductoftheYearAward.Theyhavebeenwidelydisseminatedtonearly2,000individualsin
about50workshops,seminarsandlecturesdeliveredin12countriesonthreecontinents.
BohdanOppenheimsbookLeanforSystemsEngineeringwithLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering10contains
detailedexplanationsforeachofthe147enablers,withexamples,promotedvalue,preventedwaste,
implementationsuggestions,laggingfactors,andreadinglists.Avideolecture,powerpointpresentation,
referenceguide,promotionalbrochure,casestudies,studentcompetition,andmappingofthe147enablersto
the26INCOSEandISO/IEC15288systemsengineeringprocessescanbefoundontheINCOSELeanSystems
EngineeringWorkingGroupwebsite.

10
BohdanW.Oppenheim:LeanforSystemsEngineeringwithLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering.Wiley,2011.
11
2
LeanThinking:ABriefIntroduction11
2.1
Overview
ThreeconceptsarefundamentaltotheunderstandingofLeanThinking:value,waste,andtheprocessof
creatingvaluewithoutwaste,whicharecapturedinthesixLeanPrinciples.Theseconceptsaredescribedinthis
chapterinthegeneralcontextofproductdevelopmentandareexplainedinenoughdetailsothattothereader
doesnotneedtorefertoothersources.However,anyreaderwhoisnewtotheconceptsofLeanThinking
wouldbenefitfromreadinganintroductorybooktoLeanThinking.12
LeanThinkingadoptsanumberofpracticespreviouslyknownbyothernames,suchasSixSigma,totalquality
management,concurrentengineering,testasyoufly,andothers.Thecriterionweuseforadoptionissimple,
statedasfollows:
Ifabestpracticepromotesvalue,reduceswaste,andcanbedescribedbythe6LeanPrinciples,itis
calledLean,andifthedescribedbestpracticefallswithinthescopeofthe5ProgramManagement
PerformanceDomains,itisconsideredhereasaLeanEnablerformanagingengineeringprograms.
2.2
LeanValueandProgramBenefits
Valueiswhatthecustomersaysitis,considersimportant,andiswillingtopayfor.Insimpleapplications,the
customerstateswhatisrequired,andthecontractormakesitanddeliversit,hopefullysatisfyingoreven
delightingthecustomer.Thisworkswellwhenbuyingicecream,butismuchmorechallengingwhendeveloping
anew,complextechnologicalsystem.
Inlargescaleengineeringprograms(suchasgovernmentprograms),theremaybethousandsofstakeholdersin
numerouscommunitiesofusers,acquisitionstakeholders,primecontractorandsuppliersthroughoutthevalue
chain,andotherstakeholders,suchaspoliticians,lobbyists,shareholders,andbanks,etc.Stakeholderspromote
thoseaspectsofvaluewhichareimportanttothem,andareofteninconflictwithotherstakeholders
requirements.Thesefactorsmakethevaluecaptureandcontractformulationasignificantchallengeanda
costlyprocess.Yet,valuemustbedefinedprecisely,orthesubsequentprogramwillsufferdelays,addedcosts,
frustrations,and,inextremecases,programclosureorfailure.Itiscriticalforeveryoneinvolvedintheprocess
tobefocusedoncapturingthefinalvaluepropositionwiththeabsolutebestofcompetence,wisdom,
experience,andconsensus.Avaluedefinitionmustbecrystalclear,unambiguous,andcomplete,representing
thecustomerneedsduringasystemlifecycleandallowingeffectivechannelsforvalueclarificationwithout
causingrequirementscreep.
Inprogrammanagement,thetermbenefitsisoftenusedtodescribeaconceptsimilartothatofvalue.Benefits
inprogrammanagementaredefinedastheachievementofexplicitobjectivesandlastingchangespecifiedand
approvedbycustomerstakeholders.

11
Thissectionhasbeenadaptedbytheauthorfromchapter3ofhisbook:Oppenheim,B.W.(2011).LeanforSystemsEngineeringwith
LeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering.NewYork:Wiley.Itisusedherewiththekindpermissionofthepublisher.
12
SeeSectionA.1.1intheAppendix,forexample:Womack,J.&Jones,D.(2003).LeanThinking:BanishWasteandCreateWealthinYour
Corporation,(2nded.).NewYork:Simon&Schuster.
12
2.3
Waste
TheabilitytoidentifyandeliminatewasteisacriticalskillforLeanThinking;allworkactivitiesareclassifiedinto
thefollowingthreecategories:13
1.
Valueadded(VA)activities,whichmustsatisfythefollowingthreeconditions:
x
x
x
2.
3.
Transforminformationormaterial,orreduceuncertainty(cannotbeanunnecessary
bureaucratictaskthatcreatesnovalue).
Thecustomermustbewillingtopayforit(explicitly,or,inmorecomplexprograms,implicitly,
thatis,ifthecustomerunderstoodthedetails,thecustomerwouldapproveofthisactivity).
Itisdonerightthefirsttime.(Thisdoesnotexcludelegitimate,valueaddingengineering
iterations,trialanderror,etc.)
Required(alsocallednecessary)nonvalueadded(RNVA)activities,whichdonotmeettheprevious
definition,butwhichcannotbeeliminatedbecausetheyarerequiredbylaw,contract,company
mandate,currenttechnology,orothersimilarreason.
Nonvalueadded(NVA)activities,whichconsumeresourcesandcreatenovalue.Theyarepurewaste
(e.g.,unneededreportsandemails,idletime,defectsthatrequirerework,etc.)
TaiichiOhnoclassifiedwasteinmanufacturingintosevencategories.SeveralauthorshaveadaptedOhno's
sevenproductionwastesforengineeringprograms14.
Table3liststhewastesinthecontextofengineeringprograms.
2.4
TheSixLeanPrinciples
TheprocessofcreatingvaluewithoutwasteiscapturedintosixLeanPrinciples:Value,MaptheValueStream,
Flow,Pull,Perfection,andRespectforPeople.15TheeffectivenessoftheLeanPrincipleshasbeendemonstrated
inabroadrangeofworkenvironments,includingproduction,engineering,systemsengineering,supplychain
management,financeandgeneraladministration,education,andhealth.16
Thebestpractices,whichwecallLeanEnablers,thatimplementthesixLeanPrinciplesinengineeringprograms,
arepresentedinSection5.WeintroducetheLeanPrinciplesinthefollowingsubsectionsintheestablished
order(startingwithValue,endingwithRespect).However,whendiscussingtheLeanEnablersinSection5,we
movedthesectiononimplementingRespectforPeopletothetop,aswebelievethatthoseenablersarethe
mostrelevant,andthemostoftenoverlooked(theotherEnablersthenfollowintheusualorder).

13
Womack,J.,&Jones,D.(2003).Leanthinking:Banishwasteandcreatewealthinyourcorporation,(2nded.).NewYork:Simon&
Schuster.
14
Oehmen,J.,&Rebentisch,E.(2010).Wasteinleanproductdevelopment.MITLAIWhitepaperSeries,Boston,MA:Massachusetts
InstituteofTechnology;Morgan,J.,&Liker,J.(2006).TheToyotaproductdevelopmentsystem:Integratingpeople,processand
technology.BocaRaton,FL:CRCPress(formerlyProductivityPress);andOppenheim,B.W.2011.LeanforSystemsEngineeringwithLean
EnablersforSystemsEngineering.Hoboken,NJ:Wiley.
15
InadditiontoWomack&Jones(2003)andOppenheimsworks(2011),refertoSugimori,Y.,Kusunoki,K.,Cho,F.&Uchikawa,S.
(1977):ToyotaProductionSystemandKanbanSystemsMaterializationofJustInTimeandRespectForHumanSystems.International
JournalofProductionResearch,Vol.15,No.6,pp.553564.
16
SeeWomack&Jones(2003);Oppenheim(2011);andMurman,E.etal.(2002).Leanenterprisevalue:InsightsfromMITslean
aerospaceinitiative.NewYork:Palgrave.
13
Table3:SevenTypesofEngineeringProgramWastewithExamples
Seven Wastes
Engineering Program Examples
Overproductionof
Information
x
x
x
x
Waiting
x
x
x
x
x
Unnecessary
Movementof
Information
x Handoffs
x Excessiveinformationdistribution
x Disjointedfacilities,politicallymotivatedgeographicaldistributionofwork(e.g.,"madein50
states"),lackofcolocation
OverProcessingof
Information
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Refinementsbeyondwhatisneeded
Pointdesignusedtooearly,causingmassiveiterations
Uncontrollediterations(toomanytasksiterated,excessivecomplexity)
Lackofstandardization
Dataconversions
2Ddrawings(3Dshouldbeusedconsistently)
Useofexcessivelycomplexsoftware"monuments"fornoapparentreason(e.g.useofcomplex
softwarewhenaspreadsheetwouldbeacceptable)
Inventoryof
Information
x
x
x
x
Keepingmoreinformationthanneeded
Excessivetimeintervalsbetweenreviews
Poorconfigurationmanagementandcomplicatedretrieval
Poor5S's(sorting,straightening,systematiccleaning,standardizing,andsustaining)inofficeor
databases
Unnecessary
MovementofPeople
x Unnecessarymovementduringtaskexecution
x Peoplehavingtomovetogainoraccessinformation
x Manualinterventiontocompensateforthelackofprocess
Rework,Defects
x Thekillerres:Rework,Rewrite,Redo,Reprogram,Retest...
x Unstablerequirements
x Uncoordinatedcomplextasktakingsomuchtimetoexecutethatitisobsoletewhenfinishedand
hastoberedone
x Incomplete,ambiguous,orinaccurateinformation
x Inspectiontocatchdefects
Producingmorethanneededbynextprocess
Creatingdocumentsthatwerenotrequested
Redundanttasks,unneededtasks
Overdissemination,thatissendinginformationtotoomanypeople(e.g.,excessiveemail
distribution)
x Sendingavolumewhenasinglenumberwasrequested
x Workonanincorrectrelease(informationchurning)
x Lackofreuseofexpertise,reinventingthewheel
Waitingforinformationordecisions
Informationordecisionswaitingforpeopletoact
Largequeuesthroughoutthereviewcycle
Longapprovalsequences
Unnecessaryserialeffort
2.4.1 Principle1:Value
Capturethevaluedefinedbythecustomerstakeholders,whomaybeeitherexternalorinternal.Theexternal
customerwhopaysforthesystemorservicedefinesthefinalvalueforthedeliverable.Internalcustomers
receivetheoutputofataskoractivityandusuallydonotexplicitlypay.Inbothcases,thecustomerstakeholder
istheonewhodefineswhatconstitutesvalue.Theimportanceofcapturingbothtaskandprogramvaluewith
precision,clarity,andcompletenesscannotbeoveremphasized,tocreateaclearprogramstrategyandavoid
unnecessaryreworkbeforeresourceexpendituresrampup.Forprogramswithaverylongduration(suchas
14
complextechnologyacquisitionprogramsbythegovernment),externalfactorscanchange,andcustomervalue
expectationsmayneedtoberevisited,updated,orrevised.17Clearly,acarefulbalanceisneeded.Ontheone
hand,constantchangeandinstabilitymustbeavoidedorthesystemcostswillgrowandtheschedulewill
lengthen(e.g.,theSpaceBasedInfraredSystem(SBIRS)program18).Ontheotherhand,customervalue
expectationsorthreatsmaychange,andanoriginalvaluepropositioncouldbecomeobsolete(e.g.,cancellation
offurtherF22aircraftproduction).Thisisthestrongestargumentforshorterprogramschedules.TheLean
Enablersthatoperationalizethisprinciplearedesignated2.xandarepresentedinSection5.(TheLean
EnablersstartwiththoserelatingtoLeanPrinciple6,becauseofitsimportance(seealsoSection2.4.6).
2.4.2 Principle2:ValueStream
Mapthevaluestream(plantheprogram)andeliminatewaste.Mapallendtoendlinkedtasks,
control/decisionnodes,andtheinterconnectingflowsnecessarytorealizecustomervalue.Duringthemapping
process,identifyandeliminateallnonvalueaddedactivities,minimizeallnecessarynonvalueactivities,and
enabletheremainingactivitiestoflowwithoutrework,backflow,orstopping(theflowisdescribedinPrinciple
3).Akeyconcepttograspinmovingfromthemanufacturingtotheengineeringdomainisthatin
manufacturing,materialisbeingtransformedandmoved,whileinthelatter,informationisbeingtransformed
andmoved.Theterminformationflowreferstothepacketsofinformation(knowledge)createdbydifferent
tasks,whichflowstoothertasks(design,analysis,test,review,decision,orintegration)forsubsequentvalue
adding.ThereareanumberofimplicationswhenapplyingLeanThinkingprinciples,techniques,andtoolstoa
mediumthatisasfluidasinformation.Carefuldetailedplanningandprogramfrontloading,commonor
interoperabledatabases,rapidandpervasivecommunicationofdecisionsusingIntranetsorpersonal
communicationandfrequentintegrativeeventsforefficientrealtimeresolutionofissuesanddecisionmaking,
standupmeetings,orvirtualrealityreviewsaresometechniquestokeepinformationflowing.Eachtaskadds
valueifitincreasesthelevelofusefulinformationandreducesriskinthecontextofdeliveringcustomervalue.
Thereexistpracticalguidesforvaluestreammappinginengineeringprograms.19
Thegenerictermplanningincludestwodistinctphases:(1)enterprisepreparationand(2)programplanning.
Leancorporateenterprisesprepareresources(people,processes,andtools)thatwillserveallprograms.These
resourcesincludeaninfrastructureforcontinuedemployeeeducationandtraining;creationofthecommunities
ofpractice;centraldatabaseswithformerdesignandprogramdata,lessonslearned,andknowledgeshared;
standardizationofprocesses;preparationoftheprograminfrastructure,equipment,andtools;rotationofkey
people;strategicdecisionsforsubsystemreuseinfutureprograms;andtrainingofemployeesinthebest
communicationandcoordinationpractices.Theseactivitieswillserveallprogramsandshouldbehandledatthe
corporatelevel,enhancingthelongtermcompetitivenessoftheenterprise.Incontrast,programplanningrefers
totheplanningeffortforaspecificengineeringprogram.TheLeanEnablersthatoperationalizethisprincipleare
3.xandarepresentedinSection5.3.
2.4.3 Principle3:Flow
Flowtheworkthroughplannedandstreamlinedvalueaddingstepsandprocesses,withoutstoppingoridle
time,unplannedrework,orbackflow.Tooptimizeflow,planforthemaximumconcurrencyoftasksuptonear
capacityofanenterprise.Robustcaptureofvalue,goodenterpriselevelpreparations,andgoodprogram

17
Murmanetal.(2002).
UnitedStatesGovernmentAccountabilityOffice:DefenseAcquisitions(March2007).AssessmentsofSelectedWeaponPrograms,GAO
074065SP,WashingtonD.C.
19
Seeforexample:McManus,H.(2004).Productdevelopmentvaluestreammappingmanual.LeanAdvancementInitiative,
MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology.
18
15
planningareamongthenecessaryconditionsforsubsequentLeanexecutionofaprogram.Althoughdifficult,
detailedplanningofacomplexprogramiscriticalforLean.Forexample,ittookToyotaseveraldecadesto
perfectitssystem,andToyotaemployeesstillroutinelyclaimthattheyarefarfromperfect.
Inengineeringprograms,legitimateengineeringiterationsarefrequentlyneededtoaddresschickenversus
eggtechnicalproblems,buttheytendtobetimeconsumingandexpensiveiftheycrossdisciplines.Leanflow
encouragesanefficientmethodologyoffailearlyfailoftenthroughrapidarchitectinganddiscovery
techniquesduringtheearlydesignphases.TheFlowPrinciplealsoencouragestechniquesthatobviatelengthy
iterations,forexamplethroughdesignfrontloading,tradespaceexplorations,setbaseddesigns,modular
designs,legacyknowledge,andlargemargins.Wheredetailedcrossfunctionaliterationsarenecessary,Lean
flowoptimizestheiterationloopsforoverallvalue,whilelimitingthetaskswithintheloopstothosethat
experiencechangesofstateandoptimizingtheirexecutionforbestvalue.TheLeanEnablersthatoperationalize
thisprincipleare4.xandarepresentedinSection5.4.
2.4.4 Principle4:Pull
Letcustomerstakeholderspullvalue.Inmanufacturing,theidealpullprincipleisimplementedastheJustin
Time(JIT)deliveryofpartsandmaterialstotheneedingstationandtotheexternalcustomer.Inprogram
applications,thepullprinciplehastwoimportantmeanings:(1)theinclusionofanytaskinaprogrammustbe
justifiedbyaspecificneedorrequestfromaninternalorexternalstakeholderandcoordinatedwiththem;and
(2)thetaskshouldbecompletedwhenthestakeholderneedstheoutputbecauseexcessivelyearlycompletion
leadstoshelflifeobsolescence,includingpossiblelossofhumanmemoryorchangedrequirements,andlate
completionleadstoscheduleslipanddestabilizationofcarefullyplannedtasksequencesintheprogram.
Therefore,everytaskownershouldbeinclosecommunicationwiththeinternalcustomerstofullyunderstand
theirneedsandexpectationsandtocoordinatework,modalities,anddeliverables.Programsthatarecomplex
enoughtorequiresystemsengineeringneedbothaLeanThinkingcustomeraswellasaLeanThinkingcreator.
AcustomerwhomakesarbitrarydemandspreventsaLeanoutcome,anduncontrolledpulltendstocreate
chaos.TheLeanEnablersthatoperationalizethisprincipleare5.xandarepresentedinSection5.5.
2.4.5 Principle5:Perfection
Pursueperfectioninallprocesses.Globalcompetitionisabrutalracewithoutafinishline,requiring
continuousimprovementsofprocessesandproducts.Yet,noorganizationcanaffordtospendresources
improvingeverythingonacontinuousbasis.Toclarifytheissue,thereisadistinctionbetweenprocessesand
processoutputs.Perfectingandrefiningtheworkoutputinagiventaskmustbeboundedbytheoverallvalueor
benefitproposition(systemormissionsuccessandprogrambudgetandschedule),whichdefineswhenan
outputisgoodenough.Otherwise,thenotoriouswasteofoverprocessingmayoccur.Judgmentsshouldbe
madebyexperienceddomainspecialistsandengineersinclosecoordinationwithsystemsengineersand
programmanagerswhoareresponsibleforoverallflowofvalue.Incontrast,engineeringandotherprocesses
mustbecontinuouslyimprovedforneverendingcompetitivereasons.Itisimportantfortheenterpriseto
understandthedistinctionbetweenprocessandproductperfectionandprovideresourcesaccordingly.Two
featuresofLeanhelpinprioritizingprocessesforimprovement:(1)makingallimperfectionsintheworkplace
visibletoall;and(2)prioritizingtoeliminatethebiggestimpedimentstoflow.Seeingproblemsastheyappearin
realtimeisconducivetomakingbetterdecisionsoncorrectiveactionsandbetterprioritizationof
improvements.Whennoticedearly,imperfectionstendtobeeasierandlessexpensivetofix;unnoticedearly
theytendtogrowtocrisisproportionsandrequireextensiveactionstomitigate.Makingimperfectionsvisibleis
16
amotivatorforapplyingcontinuousimprovementinrealtime.20Theenterpriseshouldcreateaneffective
infrastructureforcapturingknowledgeandlessonslearnedandforpromotingcontinuouseducationtomake
eachprogrambetterthanthelast.TheLeanEnablersthatoperationalizethisprincipleare6.xandare
presentedinSection5.6.
2.4.6 Principle6:RespectforPeople
Respectthepeopleinyourprogram.ALeanenterpriseisanorganizationthatrecognizesitspeoplearethe
mostimportantresourceandisonethatadoptshighperformanceworkpractices.InaLeanprogram,people
areencouragedtoidentifyproblemsandimperfectionshonestlyandopenlyinrealtime,brainstormrootcauses
andcorrectiveactionswithoutfear,andplaneffectivesolutionstogetherbyconsensustopreventaproblem
fromreoccurring.Whenissuesarise,thesystemisblamedandnotthemessengers.Experiencedand
knowledgeableleadersleadandmentor,butalsoempowerfrontlineemployeestosolveproblemsimmediately.
Suchanenvironmentrequiresacultureofmutualrespectandtrust,openandhonestcommunication,and
synergisticandcooperatingrelationshipsofallstakeholders.TheLeanEnablersthatoperationalizethisprinciple
are1.xandarepresentedasthefirstsetofEnablersbecauseoftheirimportanceinSection5.1.

20
SeeMorgan,J.,&Liker,J.(2006).TheToyotaproductdevelopmentsystem:integratingpeople,processandtechnology.BocaRaton,Fl:
CRCPress(formerlyProductivityPress).
17
3
IntegratingProgramManagementandSystemsEngineering
3.1
ManagementRolesinSuccessfulEngineeringPrograms
Inthehistoryofexceptionallysuccessfulengineeringprograms,oneconstantthemebecomesevident:
successfulprogramsareledbyexceptionalleaderswhopossessacriticalskillsetandmaintainresponsibility,
authority,andaccountabilityforsuccessthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.ExamplesincludetheU.S.nuclear
submarineprogramledbyAdm.Rickover,theearlySkunkWorksledbyKellyJohnson(U2andSR71),the
recentAppleproductsledbySteveJobs,andmanyToyotaandHondaautomotiveprograms.
Theseleadersexhibitedfourcriticalandcomplementaryskills:
x
x
x
Deepknowledgeandexperienceintheprogramdomain.
Leadershipandvisionskills.
Knowledgeinbothsystemsengineeringandprogrammanagement.
Unfortunately,inmostcases,seniorprogram
leadershipistrappedinafunctionalrolemindsetthat
oftenlackstheunderstanding(andsometimesalso
appreciation)ofthecomplementaryandcriticalskills
andfunctionsthattheircounterpartsperform.INCOSE
andPMIhavepublishedajointstatementexpressing
theircommitmenttoclosingthisgap21(seeFigure6).
WhilethefocusoftheLeanEnablerspresentedinthis
documentisthebetterintegrationofprogram
managementandsystemsengineering,westrongly
recommendthatthemanagerwho,ultimately,is
responsible,hasauthority,andisheldaccountablefor
thesuccessoftheprogrammusthaveastrong
understandingofbothprogrammanagementand
systemsengineeringdisciplines.
Itisnotimportantwhichpaththismanagerfollowedto
attainthispositionorwhatthepositionstitleis.Itis,in
fact,differentinprogramsfromvariouscompaniesand
variousindustries:programleader,programmanager
orchiefengineer,tonameafew.Forpurposesofthis
guide,wewillrefertothepersonwiththeultimateresponsibility,authority,andaccountability(RAA)inthe
programastheprogrammanager,withoutimplyingastrongerbackgroundineitherprogrammanagementor
systemsengineering.
Figure6:Betterprogramperformancethrough
integrationofprogrammanagementandsystems
engineering.21
TheRAAshouldbesupportedbyateamofpeople,fromboththebusinessaswellasthetechnicaldisciplines.
Theleadersofbusinessandtechnicaloperationsmustatleasthavesufficientworkingknowledgeand
appreciationfortheircolleaguesjobsinordertoworktogethereffectivelyasoneunit,supportingtheprogram.
Thepurposeofthisguideisnottoprescribeanyspecificformofprogramorganization,butratherto
recommendthecriteriathathavebeenproventocontributetosuccessfulprograms.

21
Langley,M.,Robitaille,S.&Thomas,J.(2011).TowardsaNewMindset:BridgingtheGapBetweenProgramManagementandSystems
Engineering.SimultaneouslypublishedinINCOSEInsight,14(3),45,andPMNetwork,25(9).
18
3.2
OverviewofProgramManagement22
3.2.1 WhatIsaProgram?
Aprogramisagroupofrelatedprojects,subprograms,
andprogramactivitiesmanagedinacoordinatedwayto
obtainbenefitsnotavailablefrommanagingthem
individually.Programscomprisevariouscomponents
includingindividualprojectsandworkrelatedtothese
componentprojects,suchastrainingandoperations
andmaintenanceactivities.Nonprojectelementsthat
arealsopartoftheprogramincludeactivities,suchas
themanagementeffortandinfrastructureneededto
managetheprogram(e.g.,programgovernanceor
programstakeholderengagementactivities).Thus,
programsmayincludeelementsofrelatedwork(e.g.,
managingtheprogramitself)outsidethescopeofthe
discreteprojectsinaprogram.
Programsdeliverbenefitstoorganizationsby
generatingbusinessvalue,enhancingcurrent
Figure7:ThefiveProgramManagementPerformance
capabilities,ordevelopingnewcapabilitiesforthe
Domains.
organization,customers,orstakeholders.Abenefitis
anoutcomeofactions,behaviors,products,systems,orservicesthatprovideutilitytothesponsoring
organizationaswellastotheprogramsintendedbeneficiariesoraudience.
Programsareameansofachievingorganizationalgoalsandobjectives,ofteninthecontextofandalignedwith
astrategicplan.Programbenefitsmaybedeliveredincrementallythroughoutthedurationoftheprogram,or
maybedeliveredallatonceattheendoftheprogram.
3.2.2 ProgramManagementPerformanceDomains
Throughoutitslifecycle,aneffectiveprogramdeliverschangetoavarietyofbusinessprocesses,anddoesso
throughtheactionsoftheprogrammanagerwhoworkswithinfiveProgramManagementPerformance
Domains(seeFigure7).Together,theseperformancedomainscomprisetheprogrammanagementframework
andarecrucialtothesuccessoftheprogram:
x
x
x
ProgramStrategyAlignmentIdentifyingopportunitiesandbenefitsthatachievetheorganizations
strategicobjectivesthroughprogramimplementation.
ProgramBenefitsManagementDefining,creating,maximizing,andsustainingthebenefitsprovided
byprograms.
ProgramStakeholderEngagementCapturingstakeholderneedsandexpectations,gainingand
maintainingstakeholdersupport,andmitigating/channelingopposition.

22
ThefollowingtextreflectsthedescriptionofprogrammanagementcontainedinthereviewversionofTheStandardforProgram
ManagementThirdEdition(ExposureDraftVersion)releasedinFebruary2012,reflectingtheproposedchangestothestandardfor
publicreviewandcomment.ThefinalcontentofTheStandardforProgramManagementThirdEdition,scheduledforpublicationin
2013,mayvaryfromtheexposuredraftversionoftherevisedstandard.
ProjectManagementInstitute,2012.Allrightsreserved.PermissiontouseanymaterialrelatedtoPMIsTheStandardforProgram
ManagementThirdEdition(ExposureDraft2012)shouldberequestedfromtheProjectManagementInstitute.
19
ProgramGovernanceEstablishingprocessesandproceduresformaintainingproactiveprogram
managementoversightanddecisionmakingsupportforapplicablepoliciesandpracticesthroughout
theentireprogramlifecycle.
ProgramLifeCycleManagementManagingallprogramactivitiesrelatedtoprogramdefinition,
programbenefitsdelivery,andprogramclosure.
Thesedomainsarecommonthreadsthatrunthroughthelifeofactiveprograms.Itiswithinthesedomainsthat
theprogrammanagerandtheprogramteamperformtheirtasks.Thenatureandthecomplexityoftheprogram
beingimplementeddeterminestheamountofactivityrequiredinaparticulardomainatanyparticularpointin
time,buteveryprogramrequiressomeactivityineachoftheseperformancedomainsduringtheactivelifeof
theprogramandtheworkwithinthesedomainsisoftenrepeatedfrequently.
3.2.3 ProgramManagementSupportingProcesses
Programlevelsupportingprocessesenableasynergisticapproachtoprogrammanagementforthepurposeof
deliveringprogrambenefits.Insimilarfashiontoprojectmanagementprocesses,programmanagement
supportingprocessesrequirecoordinationwithfunctionalgroupsintheorganizationbutinabroadercontext.
Programmanagementsupportingprocessesinclude:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
ProgramFinancialManagement
ProgramScopeManagement
ProgramScheduleManagement
ProgramRiskManagement
ProgramQualityManagement
ProgramResourceManagement
ProgramCommunicationManagement
ProgramProcurementManagement
3.2.4 DeliveringProgramBenefits
ProgrammanagersfocusattentionondeliveryofProgramBenefits(seealsothevaluediscussioninthe
sectiononLeanthinking)andrelyonthevariouscomponentswithintheprogramtocontributecollectivelyto
theachievementoftheprogramsintendedoutcomes.Theprogrammanageractivelyengagesineachofthe
fiveperformancedomains,applyingtheprogrammanagementsupportingprocessesandfocusingonthe
outcomesoftheprogram,assessingthecontributioneachofthecomponentsmakestotheoveralleffort,and
adjustingasnecessarytoensuretheoverallprogramtrajectoryandtheperformanceoftheindividual
componentsdeliveragainstintendedbenefits.BenefitsManagementhelpsensurethebenefitsachievedduring
theconductoftheprogramcanbesustainedbeyonditsclosure.
3.3
OverviewofSystemsEngineering
3.3.1 BriefHistory
Themodernoriginsofsystemsengineeringcanbetracedtothe1930sandthedevelopmentofairdefense
systems.Ittookamoreformalshapein1954inworkbySiRamoandDeanWoldridgeonthefirstcontractto
performsystemsengineeringandtechnicalassistance(SETA).Underthiscontract,RamoandWooldridge
developedsomeofthefirstprinciplesforSEandappliedthemtotheballisticmissileprogramconsideredone
ofthemostsuccessfulmajortechnologydevelopmenteffortseverundertakenbytheU.S.government.Systems
engineeringisthepracticalengineeringrealizationofsystemsthinkingacomprehensivedesignprocessofthe
systemthatsatisfiesallcustomerstakeholderneedsduringanentiresystemlifecycle.
20
3.3.2 PerspectivesandDefinitions23
Systemsengineeringhasthreeimportantaspects:
x
x
x
Systemsengineeringisadisciplinethatconcentratesonthedesignandapplicationofthewhole
(system)asdistinctfromtheparts.Itinvolveslookingataprobleminitsentirety,takingintoaccountall
thefacetsandallthevariablesandrelatingthesocialtothetechnicalaspect.
Systemsengineeringisaniterativeprocessoftopdownsynthesis,development,andoperationofa
realworldsystemthatsatisfies,inanearoptimalmanner,thefullrangeofrequirementsforthesystem.
Systemsengineeringisaninterdisciplinaryapproachandmeanstoenabletherealizationofsuccessful
systems.Itfocusesondefiningcustomerneedsandrequiredfunctionalityearlyinthedevelopment
cycle,documentingrequirements,andthenproceedingwithdesignsynthesisandsystemvalidation
whileconsideringthecompleteproblem:operations,costandschedule,performance,trainingand
support,testing,manufacturing,anddisposal.SEconsidersboththebusinessandthetechnicalneedsof
allcustomerswiththegoalofprovidingaqualityproductthatmeetstheuserneeds.
Thesystemsengineeringperspectiveisbasedonsystemsthinking.Systemsthinkingoccursthroughdiscovery,
learning,diagnosis,anddialoguethatleadtosensing,modeling,andtalkingabouttherealworldtobetter
understand,define,andworkwithsystems.Systemsthinkingisauniqueperspectiveonrealityaperspective
thatsharpensawarenessofthewholesandhowthepartswithinthosewholesinterrelate.Asystemsthinker
knowshowsystemsfitintothelargercontextofdaytodaylife,howtheybehave,andhowtomanagethem.
Systemsthinkingrecognizescircularcausation,whereavariableisboththecauseandtheeffectofanotherand
recognizestheprimacyofinterrelationshipsandnonlinearandorganicthinkingawayofthinkingwherethe
primacyofthewholeisacknowledged.
TheSEprocesshasaniterativenaturethatsupportslearningandcontinuousimprovement.Astheprocesses
unfold,systemsengineersuncovertherealrequirementsandtheemergentpropertiesofthesystem.
Complexitycanleadtounexpectedandunpredictablebehaviorofsystems;therefore,oneoftheobjectivesisto
minimizeundesirableconsequences.Thismaybeaccomplishedthroughtheinclusionofandcontributionsfrom
expertsacrossrelevantdisciplinescoordinatedbythesystemsengineer.
SinceSEhasahorizontalorientation,includingbothtechnicalandmanagementprocesses,itbecomesclearwhy
aneffectiveintegrationofsystemsengineeringwithprogrammanagementisveryimportant.Bothprocesses
dependupongooddecisionmaking.Decisionsmadeearlyinthelifecycleofasystemwhoseconsequencesare
notclearlyunderstoodcanhaveenormousimplicationslaterinthelifeofasystem.Itisthetaskofthesystems
engineertoexploretheseissuesandmakecriticaldecisionsinatimelymanner.
3.3.3 SystemsEngineeringProcessGroupsandProcesses
SystemsengineeringencompassesfourmajorprocessgroupsthataredescribedintheINCOSESystems
EngineeringHandbookandareconsistentwithISO/IEC15288:2008(seeFigure8).

23
ThisandthenextsectionarequotedandadaptedfromtheINCOSESystemsEngineeringHandbook,v.3.2.2,October2011,whichis
consistentwiththeISO/IEC15288:2008standard.
21

Figure8:Overviewofsystemsengineeringprocessgroupsandprocesses(Source:INCOSESEHandbook)
Thosefourprocessgroupsarebrieflysummarizedasfollows.Thenumberingcorrespondstothenumberingin
theINCOSESystemsEngineeringHandbook.
x
ProcessGroup4:TechnicalProcesses:
(4.1)StakeholderRequirementsDefinitionProcess
(4.2)RequirementsAnalysisProcess
(4.3)ArchitecturalDesignProcess
(4.4)ImplementationProcess
(4.5)IntegrationProcess
(4.6)VerificationProcess
(4.7)TransitionProcess
(4.8)ValidationProcess
(4.9)OperationProcess
(4.10)MaintenanceProcess
(4.11)DisposalProcess
(4.12)CrossCuttingTechnicalMethods
ProcessGroup5:ProjectProcesses:
(5.1)ProjectPlanningProcess
(5.2)ProjectAssessmentandControlProcess
(5.3)DecisionManagementProcess
(5.4)RiskManagementProcess
22
(5.5)ConfigurationManagementProcess
(5.6)InformationManagementProcess
(5.7)MeasurementProcess
x
ProcessGroup6:AgreementProcesses:
(6.1)AcquisitionProcess
(6.2)SupplyProcess
ProcessGroup7:OrganizationalProjectEnablingProcesses:
(7.1)LifeCycleModelManagementProcess
(7.2)InfrastructureManagementProcess
(7.3)ProjectPortfolioManagementProcess
(7.4)HumanResourceManagementProcess
(7.5)QualityManagementProcess
TwoadditionalprocesscategoriesareaddedforthepurposeofmappingtheLeanEnablerstotheSystems
EngineeringProcess(see0fordetails).AllProcesses(All)liststheenablersthatapplytoallSEprocesses.
EnterprisePreparationProcess(EPP)liststheenablersthatbenefitallpresentandfutureprogramsinthe
enterpriseorcorporationand,therefore,shouldbeimplementedattheenterpriseratherthanattheprogram
level,ifpossible.
3.4
EngineeringProgramStakeholders
3.4.1 OverviewandStakeholderGroups
TheLeanEnablersmakefrequentreferencestostakeholders.Theintentofthissectionistoclarifyhowweuse
thatterm.Largescaleengineeringprogramsarecomplexandsoistheirstakeholderbase.WhileLeanThinking
focusesondeliveringvaluetothecustomerstakeholders,therearelargenumbersofinternalandexternal
stakeholderswhoareinvolvedingeneratingthisvalue.Ultimately,theobjectivesandthebehaviorofall
stakeholdersmustaligninorderforaprogramtobeefficientandeffective.Thisisoneofthemajorchallenges
inthemanagementoftheseprograms.Itplaysaprominentroleinbothprogrammanagementaswellas
systemsengineeringstandards.
Engagingentities,organizations,andpeoplefromtheinitialphaseoftheprogramwilldirectlycontributetothe
successfullifecycle,objectives,andbenefitdeliveryoftheprogram.Historically,ithasbeenimperativeto
identifyandengagealloftherespectivepeopleandorganizationsfromtheinceptiontothefinaldeliveryofthe
program.
Sincestakeholdernetworksattheprogramlevelaremuchbroader,andinmanycases,muchmorecomplex
thanattheprojectlevel,architectinganeffectiveandefficientinfrastructuretocommunicateandcollaborate
withalllevelsoftheprogramsinterestedpartiesiscritical.
Although,therearemanydefinitionswhichmayvaryfromsourcetosourceandcompanytocompany,
stakeholdersaredirectorindirectentities,individuals,orgroupsinaprogramwhohaveaninterestinorwillbe
affectedbytheprogramsresults.Inanutshell,programstakeholdersarethoseentitieswithinoroutsidea
programandtheorganizationthat(1)sponsortheprogram,(2)areaffectedbyorderiveagainfromthe
benefitsthattheprogramdelivers,or(3)haveaninfluenceontheprogramexecution(seeTable4).
Fromtheverystartoftheprogram,theprogrammanagementteammustclearlyidentifythestakeholders,and
determinetheirlevel/spanofinvolvement,influence,decisionmakingauthority,activities,androles.Thisalso
includesthestakeholdersrequirementsandexpectationstoensureasuccessfulprogramimplementationand
finaldelivery.
23
Table4:Groupsofprogramstakeholders
Customer Stakeholders
Definition
Examples
x Sponsortheprogram
x Arethetargetofthe
benefitfromthe
programdelivery
x Consumer
x Buyer
x Evaluator
x User
Program Execution
Stakeholders
x Influencethe
programexecution
x Programteamsand
theirmembers
x Programmanager
x Systemsengineer
x Functionalmanagers
x Corporateleadership
x Suppliersand
contractors
External Stakeholders
x Areaffectedbythe
programwithout
beingdirectly
targeted
x Localcommunities
orgeneralpublic
x Taxpayer
x Legislators
x Shareholders
x Natural
environment
3.4.2 AspectsofStakeholderEngagement
Thereareseveralaspectstostakeholderengagement.Afewofthesignificantaspectsarehighlightedinthis
section.EngagingstakeholdersisalsoasignificantpartoftheLeanEnablersthatarepresentedinSection5.
x
x
x
x
StakeholderIdentification:Keystakeholdersshouldbeidentifiedfromtheverybeginningofthe
program.Thiswillincludetheirrole,decisionspan,requirements,expectations,andtheirinput.
StakeholderMapping:Relationshipsofthestakeholderstooneanotherandtotheprogramcanbe
definedandmappedtoensuretheclarity,boundary,andextentofthedecision.Typicalrelationship
mapswilladdresstheownersorganization,governmentalagenciesandauthorities,financialand
investorgroups,andkeyexternalstakeholdergroups.
StakeholderIssueTracking:Foreachstakeholder,aclearidentificationofmajorissuesofpotential
interestiscompiledandacrossprogrammasterissueslistisconstructed.
StakeholderObjectivesTracking:Aninitialsurveyoftheobjectivesthatstakeholdersaretryingto
accomplisheitherbywayofprogramorprojectoutcomeorconcernsisidentifiedinitiallybythe
programmanagerandrefinedthroughthestakeholderengagementprocessandfeedbackfromproject
levelcontractors.
StakeholderRoleDefinition:Theprogrammanagementteammustidentifythelevelandspanof
involvementofexternalandinternalstakeholdersandcommunicatethese.Thefollowingexampleisthe
RACIstructureforcategorizingthelevelandspanofinvolvement:
o
o
o
o
o
Responsiblereferstoapersonsspanofresponsibilitytocompletethetask.
Authorityreferstothelevelofownershipandspanofthelargerdecisions.
Accountablereferstohavingtoanswerforthetaskcompletionaccordingtoexpectations,including
takingpraiseorblamefortheresult.
Consultedreferstoensuringreviewsoflatestdecisionspriortothefinalization.
Informedreferstoensuringtimelycommunication,althoughnoactionsmayberequiredfromthe
person.
Toplananddeliverprogramssuccessfully,programmanagersmustmaintainacomprehensivestakeholders
portfoliotomanageandtrackalloftheseaspects.
24
3.5
MeasuringValueinEngineeringPrograms24
Despitetheneedforaccountabilityinpubliclyfundedendeavorshavingthemagnitudeofengineering
programs,cleardefinitionsofsuccess,valueandprogrambenefitsareoftenneglected.Itiscrucialtothoroughly
definethetypesofvalueorbenefitswhichsuccessfullargescaleengineeringprogramsprovide.
Thepossiblevaluepropositionsofprogramsarecomplexanddiverseandextendbeyondtheclassicconceptof
cost,schedule,andqualitythelevelatwhichprojectsareusuallyevaluated.Thesevaluepropositionsmust
alsoaddressaspectsoforganizationalchangeandsocietalimpact,whichareinherentinthenatureofmany
largescaleengineeringprograms.
Basedonareviewofacademicliteratureonsuccessmeasurementinthevariousdisciplinesrepresentedin
engineeringprograms,aswellasareviewanddiscussionofearlyframeworkswithinthecommunityofpractice,
thefollowingframeworkisproposedtodescribevalueinengineeringprograms.Itconsistsof26different
metricsin5valuedimensions(seeFigure9).Theimportanceofeachvaluedimensionandmetricdependsonthe
stakeholderpreferencesofeachparticularprogram.

Figure9:Valuedimensionsandmetricsforengineeringprograms.
3.5.1 EnterpriseStrategyAlignment
WithinthedimensionofEnterpriseStrategyAlignment,theprogramisvaluedregardingitscontributiontoand
alignmentwiththeoverallstrategicgoalsoftheprogramenterprise.Thesegoalscanvaryfrommarketoriented
goals,toimagecampaignsandtosocialandenvironmentalbenefits.Theyincludetheoverallprogramsuccessof
benefitachievementandsustainmentintermsofthedesignoftheengineeredproduct.Themetricsassociated
withEnterpriseStrategyAlignmentare:
1.
SocialandEnvironmentalBenefitsassessthepositiveimpactonthesocialandecologicalenvironment
withinandaroundtheprogramenterprise.

24
Thissectionwasadaptedbytheoriginalauthorsfrom:Steuber,M.,&Oehmen,J.(2012).Criteriaforevaluatingthesuccessoflarge
scaleengineeringprograms.ProceedingsoftheInternationalDesignConferenceDESIGN12,Dubrovnik,Croatia,May2124,2012.
25
2.
3.
4.
5.
StakeholderSatisfactionconsidersthewishesandrequirementsofthewidersetofinvolvedpersons
otherthantheshareholdersorprogramsponsors.Itmeasurestowhatdegreethedifferentgroupsof
stakeholdersweresatisfiedwiththeresultandexecutionoftheprogram.
CompetitivePositiondescribestheprogramenterpriseinitscompetitiveenvironmentintermsofa
dominatingroleandtheinfluencethattheevaluatedprogramhadonimprovingorsustainingit,aswell
asanykindofcompetitiveadvantagegainedthroughtheprogram.
Reputationmeasurestheinfluencetheprogramhadonhelpingtoestablishandmaintainaspecific
desiredimageoftheprogramenterprisetothecustomersbutalsothegeneralpublicperception.
StrategyAlignmentassessestheconsistencyoftheprogram,itsgoals,andthewayitisexecutedusing
theenterprisestrategy.
3.5.2 Product,Systemand/orServicePerformanceandQuality
Thisprogramvaluedimensioncomprisesmetricsdirectlyrelatedtothetechnical(product)ordeliveryaspect
(service)ofthedesiredoutcomeandtheiracceptancebythecustomers.Themetricsare:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Performancemeasuresthetechnicalsuccessintermsofthecomplianceoftheendproductwiththe
initiallysetperformancespecifications.
Qualitymeasuresthecomplianceoftheendproductwiththeinitiallysetqualityspecifications.
Furthermore,reliabilityandmaintainabilityoftheproductinusearetakenintoaccount.
TechnologicalAchievementassessestheinventiveandinnovativecharacteroftheprogram.
CustomerSatisfactionassessesthedegreetowhichthecustomersaresatisfiedwiththeendproduct,
systemand/orservicedevelopedintheprogram.
3.5.3 FinancialandBusinessSuccess
WithinthedimensionofFinancialandBusinessSuccess,thecommercialvalueoftheprogramisassessed.The
followingsetofmetricscomprisesinternalmetrics(e.g.,cost)andexternalmetrics(e.g.,marketshare).
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
CostEffectivenessmeasurestheprofitabilityovertimeandcomparesittoenterprisethresholdsandthe
initialplanning.
Costdescribesthetotalcostsincurredduringtheprogram.Themetriccomparestheactualcostsagainst
theplannedcosts.Ifapplicabletotheprogramitcanbemeaningfultoconsidercostsrelativetothe
numberofunits.
MarketSuccessreflectsthemarketacceptanceoftheproduct,system,orservice.Italsocomprises
metricssuchasmarketshare,customerloyalty,andpercentageofsalesbynewproduct.
Revenuemeasuresthetotalmonetarysalesvolumeoftheprogramsendproduct.
Profitmeasurestheprofitabilityoftheprogramasrevenueinrelationtocosts.
ShareholderValueassessesthebenefitstheprogramachievesfortheshareholdersexpressedthrough
theimpacttheprogramhasontheenterprisevalueorthestockvalueformarketlistedenterprises.
3.5.4 LearningandChange
Thisvaluedimensionassesseshowmuchtheenterprisechangesitselfanditssurroundingenvironmentthrough
executingtheprogram.Itinvestigatestheindividualaswellastheenterpriseandultimatelysocietallevelof
learningandchangewiththefollowingmetrics:
1.
26
TopManagementInvolvement,ashasbeenstated,iscrucialforprogramsuccessasanEnabler,butcan
alsobeseenasanindicatorforsuccessintermsofincreasingtheinteractions,cohesion,andtrust
betweenmanagementandlowerlevelemployeesasanimprovedorganizationalassetforfuture
programs.
2.
3.
4.
5.
ImprovedCollaborationandCommunication,asanaspectofchangewithintheenterprise,measuresthe
progressthatisachievedinthecollaborationwithinandacrossdifferentdivisionsoftheprogram
enterprise.
LearningandDevelopmentassessesthelearningandskilldevelopmentthroughouttheprogram
enterprise.Dependingontheprogress,itcanbemeasuredonanindividualskilllevelorbehaviorlevel
oritsimpactcanbemeasuredatanorganizationwidelevel.Learninganddevelopmentalsocomprises
thesuccessofknowledgemanagementactivitiestofosterthesharingofknowledge.
EmployeeSatisfactionismeasuredthroughdirectstatementofthesatisfactionlevel(e.g.,inemployee
surveys)orthroughindirectmeasuresuchastheemployeeturnoverrate.
PreparationfortheFuturemeasurestowhatextenttheprogramcontributedtomaketheenterprise
futureproof,bydevelopingacrucialtechnologyortheestablishmentofnewimprovedprocessesthat
willhelptheenterpriseintheacquisitionandexecutionoffutureprograms.
3.5.5 ProgramManagementProcessQualityandEfficiency
Thisvaluedimensioncomprisesallmetricsdirectlyrelatedtotheprogrammanagementprocess.Itexpresses
successintermsofmanagingtheprograminamannertoensurethatthesetobjectivesaremet,while
maintainingeffectiveprocessefficiencyandresourceutilization.Thefivemetricsinthisdimensionare:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Riskassessestheuncertaintyofnegativeimpactsontheobjectivesoftheprogram.
ScopeEvolutionassessestowhatextenttheprogramobjectiveshavechangedandhowwellthe
programenterprisecopedwiththesechanges.
Objectivesmeasurethedegreetowhichthesetobjectivesthroughouttheprogrammanagement
processweremet.
Interdependenciesassesshowwellinterdependenciesbetweenprojectswithintheprogramaswellas
dependencieswithexternalprogramsandinitiativesweremanaged.
Timecomparestheactualprogramlengthwiththeschedule.
ProcessEfficiencyrelatestotheprogrammanagementprocess.Efficiencymeasurestheoutputrelated
totheinput,whatwasachievedintheprogram,andwhatamountofresourceshadtobeutilized.
27
4
Top10ThemesofChallengesinManagingEngineeringPrograms
TheCommunityofPracticeidentified160programmanagementchallenges.Thesewereprioritizedbasedon
experiencefromapproximately120programsthroughacrossindustrysurvey(withemphasisontheaerospace
anddefenseindustry).Thetop60challengesaresummarizedin10majorthemesofchallengeswhenmanaging
engineeringprograms(seeSections4.1through4.10).25
Thelistofchallengeshastwouses:
x
ThesechallengesservedasthebasisfordevelopingtheLeanEnablersthesearetheproblemsthatthe
LeanEnablerssetouttosolve.AlloftheLeanEnablerspresentedinSection5aremappedagainstone
ormoreofthechallenges.InSectionA.5.1intheAppendix,allLeanEnablersaremappedtothe
challengesthattheyaddresstoallowfortheeasyidentificationofEnablersthathelptosolvea
particularprogrammanagementproblem.
Whileallchallengesaredescribedasprogrammanagementissues,theycanalsoserveasagenericrisk
identificationchecklistduringtheearlyphasesofprograms.

Figure10:Programmanagementchallengesinfluenceeachotherincomplexnetwork.
Whilethegroupmadeeveryefforttogroupthechallengesintowelldistinguishablesets,thethemesare
stronglyrelatedtoeachother(seeFigure10).Forexample,themostcommonandsignificanttheme
firefightingisasignificantchallengeinitself,butisnottherootcauseitself.Directlyandindirectly,allofthe
otherchallengescontributetoaprogramglidingoffintoafirefightingmode,whereresourcesarespentfixing
problemsinsteadofeliminatingtheirrootcauses(leadingtomoreproblems).Figure10providesoneexampleof
howthechallengesarerelatedtoeachother.Consequently,whenmappingthechallengestotheLeanEnablers

25
Somechallengesarelistedundermorethanonetheme.Also,asmallnumberofchallengeswerenotinthetop60list,butwere
includedintheinthetoptenlistforcompleteness,basedondiscussionswiththesubjectmatterexpertgroup.
28
inSection5andSectiona.5.1,themappingfocusesonthedirectlinkbetweenthechallengeandtheenabler.
Manymoreenablersareeffectiveagainstanyparticularchallengewhenthecauseandeffectnetworkbetween
variouschallengesisconsidered.
Therootcausesofthechallengesmaybeinsideoroutsideoftheorganization.TheLeanEnablersaddresstwo
goalswithrespecttothechallenges:(1)eliminatingtherootcausesofthechallenges,iftheyareinternaltothe
programenterpriseandcanbeinfluenced;and(2)utilizingtheLeanEnablerstomaketheorganizationmore
responsiveandeffectiveindealingwiththesymptomsandpreventcascadingproblems,whentherootcausesof
thechallengesareexternaltotheprogramenterprise(orcannotberesolvedforanyotherreason).
The10majorthemesofengineeringprogramchallengesandtheirunderlyingissuesarepresentedinthe
followingsections.
4.1
Theme1:FirefightingReactiveProgramExecution
Inthistheme,theprogramisexecutedinareactivemodetowardinsideandoutsideinfluences,insteadof
proactivelymanagingandcoordinatingstakeholders,risks,andissues.Thisincludes:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
4.2
Firefighting,whereresourcesarefocusedonfixingproblemsinsteadofpreventingthem
Competingresourcerequirements
Unstableprojectpriorities
Unclearorinappropriateallocationofresponsibilitiesanddecisionrights
Insufficientmanagementoralignmentofdifferingprioritieswithincollaboratingorganizations
Notenoughunderstandingofprogramrisk
Nocoherentleadershipteamthatrepresentsallimportantfunctions
Theme2:Unstable,UnclearandIncompleteRequirements
Changing,unclear,andincompleterequirementsfromcustomersandotherstakeholdersseriouslyaffectthe
efficientandeffectiveexecutionoftheprogram.Examplesoftheissuesinclude:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
4.3
Incompleteunderstandingofstakeholderrequirements
Lackofappreciationforthecomplexityoftherequirements;derivedrequirementsarenotidentified
Unstableprogrampriorities
Stakeholdersareunabletoclearlyarticulatetheirrequirements
Erroneousunderstandingofstakeholderrequirements
Insufficientpropagationofchangestocost,schedule,andperformancebaselinesthroughoutthe
program
Requirementsarenotformulatedproperly(e.g.,solutionneutral)
Insufficientadaptationofcost,schedule,andperformancebaselinestothechangingprogram
environmentandassumptions
Compliancerequirements(e.g.,internalrequirements,standards,regulations,andlaws)fordifferent
stakeholdersareindependentofeachother,notintegrated,andpossiblyconflictwithoneanother,
whichleadstoincreasedworkload,mismatchbetweenrequirements,andpreventionofefficient
fulfillmentforsimilarrequirements
Unclearunderstandingofstakeholdersperceptionsofvalue
Nolearningfrompreviousneeddefinitions
Requestforproposalisissuedbycustomertooearly
Theme3:InsufficientAlignmentandCoordinationoftheExtendedEnterprise
Thecomplexnetworkoforganizationsanddepartmentsinvolvedindeliveringtheprogramvalueisnotaligned
toitspriorities.Thisincludesthealignmentandoptimizationofstrategicprioritiesandportfolios.Examplesare:
29
x
x
x
x
x
x
4.4
Competingresourcerequirements
Insufficientmanagementandalignmentofdifferingprioritieswithincollaboratingorganizationsand
withstakeholders
Unclearprioritiesbetweenimmediatebusinessgoals(e.g.,profitabilityofcurrentprogram)and
responsibilityforotherprograms(e.g.,capturinglessonslearned,drivingcontinuousimprovement)
Unstructuredorunplannedstakeholdercommunication
Differingunderstandingandunclearunderstandingofwhatprogramenterprisecomprises
Insufficientstakeholderintegration(inparticularcustomersandsuppliers)
Theme4:LocallyOptimizedProcessesthatarenotIntegratedAcrossthe
EntireEnterprise
Inthistheme,theseprocessesonlyarelocallyoptimized.Thereisalackofvisibilityforthevaluestream,and/or
barriersbetweenorganizationalunitstoimplementaseamlessflow.Thereareinsufficienttradeoffsbetween
organizationstoreachanoveralloptimum.Exampleissuesare:
x
x
x
x
4.5
Lackofenterprisewidecoordinationofoptimization;onlyoptimizationoflocalprocessesand
organization
Lackofprocessstandardization
Pertainingtovaluestreamoptimization,thereisalackofunderstandingastohowtodealwithdifferent
typesofwaste
Lacksmechanismforvaluestreamimprovements
Theme5:UnclearRoles,Responsibilities,andAccountability
Theroles,responsibilities,andaccountabilityofindividuals,teams,projects,stafffunctions,andlinefunctions
arenotclearlydefinedinthistheme.Thisincludesissuessuchas:
x
x
x
x
x
x
4.6
Problematicallocationofresponsibilitiesanddecisionrights
Lackofalignmentandintegrationbetweenprogrammanagementandsystemsengineering
Nofosteringandmaintainingofpersonalaccountabilityforplansandoutcomes
Nocoherentleadershipteamthatrepresentsallimportantfunctions
Rolesandresponsibilitiesbetweenstaffandlinefunctionsnotdefined
Misalignedincentivesforcollaborationbetweenstaff,projectteam,suppliers,customers,orother
stakeholders
Theme6:MismanagementofProgramCulture,TeamCompetency,and
Knowledge
Inthistheme,theexpertiseandknowledgeofindividuals,teams,andtheorganizationareinsufficient,not
transferredproperly,ornotappliedappropriatelyduringtheprogram.Itisdifficulttoestablishaproductive
programculture.Examplesofissuesare:
x
x
x
x
x
x
30
Ineffectiveprocesstotransferknowledgefromexperiencedemployeesandteammemberstonew
employees(inparticular,thisoccursinindustrieswithagingworkforce)
Lackoffeedbackmechanismstoturnlessonslearnedintoaction;noimplementationofnewbest
practicesinprogrambasedonlessonslearned
Noadequatesharingofcapturedlessonslearnedacrosstheenterprise
Inadequateidentificationofindividualskilldevelopmentneeds
Nodocumentationoflessonslearned
Inadequateteamexperience
4.7
Skilllevelofindividuals(inprogrammanagement,theprogramteam,projectteamsand/orstaff)
insufficient
Theme7:InsufficientProgramPlanning
Inthistheme,theprogramplanningmaybeinaccurate,unabletoaccommodateuncertainties,orboth,which
leadstounrealisticexpectationsandplans.Thisincludesthefollowingissues:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
4.8
Unrealisticbaselinesforcost,schedule,andperformance
Insufficientpropagationofchangestocost,schedule,andperformancebaselinesthroughoutthe
program
Insufficientadaptationofcost,schedule,andperformancebaselinestothechangingprogram
environmentandassumptions
Norealisticprogramschedule
Problemswithmanagingappropriatestafflevelsduringprojectrampupandrampdown
Estimatesdonotreflectallaspectsofthelifecycle
Insufficientprobabilisticestimates
Toofewupdatesonestimatedcost,schedule,andperformanceestimatesduringearlyphasesof
programcontractingandexecution
Theme8:ImproperMetrics,MetricSystems,andKPIs
ThemetricsandKPIsusedduringtheprogramdonotcapturetheintendedperformanceattributes,incentivize
thewrongbehavior,orarelagginginsteadofpredictive.Thisincludes:
x
x
x
x
x
x
4.9
Metricsarerearviewmirrororientedandarenotgoodindicatorsoffutureissues
Metricsdonotconsiderhumanbehavior(gaming)
Nometricstoreflectcrossfunctionalprocesses
Diverseanddistributedinformationtechnologysystemsanddatarepositoriesdonotallowefficient
acquisitionandaggregationofdataformetrics
Insufficientoversightofadherencetocost/schedule/performancebaselines
Metricshaveshorttermfocus
Theme9:LackofProactiveProgramRiskManagement
Budgetaryandtimeconstraintsforcelimitedornoriskmanagementactivitytobeundertakenbytheprogram
team.Theprogramteamattemptstofunctionwithoutclearofframpsandmitigationapproaches.Ownershipof
risksisilldefined.Theissuesinclude:
x
x
x
x
x
x
Insufficientinvolvementofnecessaryfunctionalandstaffprofessionalsinriskmanagement
Notenoughunderstandingofprogramrisks
Insufficientresourcesandfundingofriskmanagementactivities(identification,assessment,mitigation,
andmonitoring)
Neglectforthehumanaspectofriskmanagement,thatis,cultureorincentivesthatpenalizethe
flaggingofrisks,orreportingofbadnews.
Disconnectbetweenriskmanagementandotherprogrammanagementprocesses
Insufficientfocusonquicklyresolvingidentifiedrisks
4.10 Theme10:PoorProgramAcquisitionandContractingPractices
Timeconstraintsforceinadequatequalityoftherequestforproposalorcontractbid.Improperincentives,
impropermanagementoflowTRLtechnologies,insufficientleadershipandinterferenceoflawsandregulations
allexacerbatethischallenge.Examplesinclude:
31
x
x
x
x
x
32
Requestforproposalisissuedbythecustomertooearly,beforecustomerrequirementshavesufficient
clarityandstability
Overridinginfluenceoffundingrelatedconstraints
Constraintsandincentivesprovidedbythecontractaremisalignedwithprogramtaskandriskprofile
Noadequateprocesstomaturetechnologiesforprograms(performanceandsystemintegration
properties)
Disconnectbetweenoperationalprogrammanagementandcontractrequirements
5.
TheLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms
ThissectioncontainstheLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms,sortedbythesixLeanPrinciples.To
emphasizetheimportanceofLeanPrinciple6,TreatPeopleasYourMostImportantAsset,theEnablersinthis
categoryarelistedfirst,followedbytheEnablersfortheLeanPrinciples15.Table6presentsanoverviewofthe
43Enablers.Theappendix(Sectiona.4)containsasimplifiedversionofthissection(asimplelistofallEnablers
andSubenablers).
Eachsubsectioncoversoneofthe6LeanPrinciples,forexample,Section5.1on1.LeanEnablers1.x:Treat
PeopleasYourMostImportantAsset(LeanPrinciple6)containsanumberofEnablers(e.g.,1.1Buildaprogram
culturebasedonrespectforpeople):
x
EachEnablerisintroducedbyanumberofexamplesthataredrawnfromvarioussources,suchas
documentationofhighlysuccessfulprogramsaspublishedbyPMI,andexamplesfromtheexperienceof
thesubjectmatterexpertsandfromtheLeanManagementliterature.Theexamplesarenotmeantto
becompleteorevenrepresentativeofwaystoimplementtheLeanEnablers,butaresnapshotsofwhat
otherprogramshaveaccomplished.Wheneverpossible,concretecompanyand/orprogramnamesare
given,butduetoconfidentialityrestrictions,thiswasnotalwayspossible.SectionA.3intheAppendix
containsadetailedlistofthesourcematerialandexampleprograms.
Additionally,eachEnablercontainsanumberofsubenablersthatgiveconcreterecommendationson
howtoimplementtheenabler(e.g.,1.1.1.Understandthatprogramsfailorsucceedprimarilybasedon
people,notprocess.Treatpeopleasthemostvaluedassets,notascommodities.).
Table5:ExampleTableUsedtoIndicateMappingofLeanEnablersandSubenablersinThreeCategories
Performance
Domain:
Challenge
Theme:
INCOSE SE
Process:
Life Cycle
Benefits
Management Management
10:
5: Roles &
3: Enterprise
4: Process
6:
9: Risk
1: Firefighting 2: Requirements
7: Planning 8: Metrics
Acquisition
Responsibilitie
Competency
Alignment
Integration
Management
Practice
s
7: Project4: Technical
5: Project
6: Agreement
8: Tailoring
Enterprise
Enabling
All Processes
Process: 6.1
Processes
Processes
Processes
Processes Preparation
Processes
Governance
Strategy
Alignment
Stakeholder
Engagement
Tohelpunderstandthecontextandapplicabilityofeachenablerandsubenabler,theyaremappedalongthree
dimensions(seeTable5foranexample):
x
ProgramManagementPerformanceDomain:Foreachenablerandsubenabler,thetableindicatesthe
domaintowhichtheenablerhasthestrongestrelationship.Thefivedomainsare:ProgramStrategy
Alignment,ProgramBenefitsManagement,ProgramStakeholderEngagement,ProgramGovernance,
andProgramLifeCycleManagement.Inaddition,SectionA.5.2intheAppendixcontainsallLean
EnablerscategorizedbytheirProgramManagementPerformanceDomain.SeeSection3.2foran
overviewoftheperformancedomains.
EngineeringProgramChallenges:Eachenablerandsubenablerisalsomappedagainstoneortwo
challengesthatitaddressesdirectly.Allofthechallengesarerelatedtooneother,asaretheLean
Enablers.Themappingcapturesonlythestrongest,mostdirectlinksbetweenanEnablerandthe
challenges.Indirectly,allEnablershelptoovercomeallofthechallenges(alsoseethediscussioninthe
introductiontoSection4).IntheAppendix,theLeanEnablersaresortedbythechallengesthatthey
address(seeSectionA.5.1).
SystemsEngineeringProcess:ThetablealsoprovidesaquickoverviewofthehighlevelSystems
Engineeringprocessthatissupportedbythisguide,followedbyanexactprocessnumber.Theappendix
33
containstheLeanEnablers,sortedbyboththeSystemsEngineeringprocess(SectionA.5.3),aswellasa
completemappingtotheLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering(SectionA.5.4).
ThemappingattheEnablerlevel(i.e.,themaincategoryforallofthesubenablers)isnotnecessarilyconsistent
withthemappingofeachsubenabler.Themappingindicatestheareaswheremostofthesubenablerswould
fall.TheLeanPrinciplespresentedinthissectionarelistedbyorderofimportanceandnotbysequential
numbering,toemphasizetheirimportance.
Table6:OverviewofLeanEnablers
#
34
Overview of Lean Enablers
Page
1
LeanEnablerstoTreatPeopleasYourMostImportantAsset(LeanPrinciple6)
35
1.1.
Buildaprogramculturebasedonrespectforpeople.
1.2.
Motivatebymakingthehigherpurposeoftheprogramandprogramelementstransparent.
1.3.
Supportanautonomousworkingstyle.
1.4.
Expectandsupportpeopleastheystriveforprofessionalexcellenceandpromotetheircareers.
1.5.
Promotetheabilitytorapidlylearnandcontinuouslyimprove.
1.6.
Encouragepersonalnetworksandinteractions.
2
LeanEnablerstoMaximizeProgramValue(LeanPrinciple1)
44
2.1.
Establishthevalueandbenefitoftheprogramtothestakeholders.
2.2.
Focusallprogramactivitiesonthebenefitsthattheprogramintendstodeliver.
2.3.
Frequentlyengagethestakeholdersthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.
2.4.
Develophighqualityprogramrequirementsamongcustomerstakeholdersbeforebiddingandexecution
processbegins.
2.5.
Clarify,derive,andprioritizerequirementsearly,oftenandproactively.
2.6.
Activelyminimizethebureaucratic,regulatoryandcomplianceburdenontheprogramandsubprojects.
3
LeanEnablerstoOptimizetheValueStream(LeanPrinciple2)
53
3.1.
Mapthemanagementandengineeringvaluestreamsandeliminatenonvalueaddedelements.
3.2.
Activelyarchitectandmanagetheprogramenterprisetooptimizeitsperformanceasasystem.
3.3.
Pursuemultiplesolutionsetsinparallel.
3.4.
Ensureupfrontthatcapabilitiesexisttodeliverprogramrequirements.
3.5.
Frontloadandintegratetheprogram.
3.6.
Useprobabilisticestimatesinprogramplanning.
3.7.
Workwithsupplierstoproactivelyavoidconflictandanticipateandmitigateprogramrisk.
3.8.
Planleadingindicatorsandmetricstomanagetheprogram.
3.9.
DevelopanIntegratedprogramscheduleatthelevelofdetailforwhichyouhavedependableinformation.
3.10.
ManagetechnologyreadinesslevelsandprotectprogramfromlowTRLdelaysandcostoverruns.
3.11.
Developacommunicationsplan.
4
LeanEnablerstoCreateProgramFlow(LeanPrinciple3)
68
4.1.
Usesystemsengineeringtocoordinateandintegrateallengineeringactivitiesintheprogram.
4.2.
Ensureclearresponsibility,accountability,andauthority(RAA)throughouttheprogramfrominitial
requirementsdefinitiontofinaldelivery.
4.3.
Foreveryprogram,useaprogrammanagerroletoleadandintegratetheprogramfromstarttofinish.
4.4.
Thetoplevelprogrammanagement(e.g.,programmanagementoffice)overseeingtheprogrammustbe
highlyeffective.
4.5.
Pursuecollaborativeandinclusivedecisionmakingthatresolvestherootcausesofissues.
4.6.
IntegrateallprogramelementsandfunctionsthroughProgramGovernance.
Overview of Lean Enablers
Page
4.7.
Useefficientandeffectivecommunicationandcoordinationwithprogramteam.
4.8.
Standardizekeyprogramandprojectelementsthroughouttheprogramtoincreaseefficiencyandfacilitate
collaboration.
4.9.
UseLeanThinkingtopromotesmoothprogramflow.
4.10.
Makeprogramprogressvisibletoall.
5
LeanEnablerstoCreatePullintheProgram(LeanPrinciple4)
81
5.1.
Pulltasksandoutputsbasedonneed,andrejectothersaswaste.
5.2.
Establisheffectivecontractingvehiclesintheprogramthatsupporttheprograminachievingtheplanned
benefitsandcreateeffectivepullforvalue.
6
LeanEnablerstoPursueProgramPerfection(LeanPrinciple5)
84
6.1.
Makeeffectiveuseofexistingprogrammanagementandorganizationalmaturitystandards.
6.2.
PursueLeanforthelongterm.
6.3.
Striveforexcellenceofprogrammanagementandsystemsengineering.
6.4.
Uselessonslearnedtomakethenextprogrambetterthanthelast.
6.5.
Usechangemanagementeffectivelytocontinuallyandproactivelyaligntheprogramwithunexpectedchanges
intheprogramsconductandtheenvironment.
6.6.
Proactivelymanageuncertaintyandrisktomaximizeprogrambenefit.
6.7.
Striveforperfectcommunication,coordination,andcollaborationacrosspeopleandprocesses.
6.8.
Promotecomplementarycontinuousimprovementmethodstodrawbestenergyandcreativityfromall
stakeholders.
5.1
LeanEnablers1.x:TreatPeopleasYourMostImportantAsset
(LeanPrinciple6)
ThissectionsummarizesallofthebestpracticesthatoperationalizeLeanPrinciple6,Respectthepeopleinyour
program.WedecidedtopresenttheseEnablersnotasthelastsection,aswouldbeappropriateifwefollowed
thenumberingoftheLeanPrinciples,butasthefirst,toemphasizeitsimportance.
1. LeanEnablerstoTreatPeopleasYourMostImportantAsset(LeanPrinciple6)
1.1 Buildaprogramculturebasedonrespectforpeople.
Stakeholder
Engagement
Benefits
Management
3: Enterprise
Alignment
4: Process
Integration
4: Technical
Processes
6: Agreement
Processes
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
Strategy
Alignment
5: Project
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
Examples:
A major aerospace company business unit established respect for people as one of its core strategies.
Program reviews and functional reviews now include reports on development, wellness, openness, and
recognition. The expectation set by senior leadership has begun to affect program culture by establishing a
trust-based communication environment and development plans that ensure that the employees and the
programs possess the required skill set for current and future success.
The Prairie Waters program reports a culture of whats right and not whos right, emphasizing the fact
that everybodys ideas are heard and treated equally, regardless of their position in the organization.
In the Fernald Feed Materials Production Center Nuclear Cleanup, as well as the Rocky Flats program, the
employees who were previously running the nuclear facility are now involved in its closing. In this case,
respect for people was expressed in the managements empathy for the workers situation and its support
for finding new jobs.
35
The Mozal Smelter program based in Mozambique, faced challenges of a different kindHIV infections.
To address this challenge, the program management The Lean Principles presented in this section are
listed by order of importance and not by sequential numbering, to emphasize their importance provided
courses in sexual education and disease prevention.
Subenablers:
1.1.1 Understandthatprogramsfailorsucceedprimarilybasedonpeople,not
process.Treatpeopleasthemostvaluedassets,notascommodities.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.1.2 Investinpeopleselectionanddevelopmenttoaddressenterpriseand
programexcellence.Ensurethathiringprocessmatchestherealneedsofthe
programfortalentandskill.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
1.1.3 Programleadershipmustbeamentorandprovideamodelfordesired
behaviorintheentireprogramteam,suchastrust,respect,honesty,
empowerment,teamwork,stability,motivationanddriveforexcellence.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.1.4 Hirepeoplebasedonpassionand"sparkintheeye"andbroadprofessional
knowledge,notonlybasedonveryspecificskillneeds(hirefortalent,trainfor
skills).Donotdelegatethiscriticaltasktocomputersscanningforkeywords.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process:7.4
1.1.5 Rewardbaseduponteamperformanceandincludeteamingabilityamongthe
criteriaforhiringandpromotion.Encourageteambuildingandteamwork.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process:7.4
1.1.6 Practice"walkaroundmanagement."Donotmanagefromcubicle;gotothe
workandseeforyourself.
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
36
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: All
10: Acquisition
Practice
1.1.7 Buildacultureofmutualtrustandsupport(thereisnoshameinaskingfor
help).
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.1.8 Promoteclosecollaborationandrelationshipbetweeninternalcustomersand
suppliers.Donotallow"lonewolfbehavior."
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process:6.2
1.1.9 Whenstaffingthetopleadershippositions(includingtheprogrammanager),
chooseteamplayersandcollaborativelymindedindividualsoverperfect
lookingcredentialsonpaper.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process:5.1
1.1.10 Whenresolvingissues,attacktheproblem,notthepeople.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.2 Motivatebymakingthehigherpurposeoftheprogramandprogramelements
transparent.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
6: Agreement
Processes
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
Examples:
In the Pentagon reconstruction program (Project Phoenix), extensive damage to the Pentagon that
resulted from the 9/11 attack was repaired in only one year because all of the parties involved in the
reconstruction effort were motivated to demonstrate Americas strength and resistance to terrorism.
Contracts were placed in a small fraction of the time normally required and construction productivity
exceeded expectations.
The Mozal Smelter provided an entirely new dimension of industrial development to the region in
Mozambique. Therefore, the higher benefit was ever present and the program management set up a
project to ensure a good integration in the environment. This included agricultural development because
building the plant required the resettlement of farmers from the construction site.
In the Montreal development program, Quartier International de Montreal, the sense of striving for a higher
purpose was strongly present. Developing a sustainable neighborhood for future generations proved to be
an effective motivator.
Other programs appealed to the individual pride of employees for being part of something exceptional. The
Salt Lake City Winter Olympics recruited volunteers by presenting their involvement as a once-in-a-lifetime
opportunity.
37
Subenablers:
1.2.1 Createasharedvisionwhichdrawsoutandinspiresthebestinpeople.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.2.2 Ensureeveryonecanseehowtheirowncontributionscontributetothe
successoftheprogramvision.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.3 Supportanautonomousworkingstyle.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
Examples:
The U.S. Coast Guard Deepwater program provided its contractor with a great deal of freedom. The
program was intended to renew the Coast Guard assets. Instead of ordering explicit numbers of each type
of equipment, the Coast Guard required a set of capabilities for its future fleet. It was up to the system
integrator contractor to decide what equipment was necessary to provide these capabilities.
A similar approach was used for the Fernald Feed Nuclear Cleanup program in Butler County, Ohio. The
main contractor was given freedom to execute the program within the guidelines of the agreed-upon
requirements.
Subenablers:
1.3.1 Useandcommunicateflowdownofresponsibility,authorityand
accountability(RAA)tomakedecisionsatlowestappropriatelevel.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
1.3.2 Eliminatefearfromtheworkenvironment.Promoteconflictresolutionatthe
lowestlevel.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.3.3 Allowcertainamountof"failure"inacontrolledenvironmentatlowerlevels,
sopeoplecantakeriskandgrowbyexperience.
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
38
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: All
10: Acquisition
Practice
1.3.4 Withinprogrampolicyandwithintheirareaofwork,empowerpeopleto
acceptresponsibilityandtakeaction.Promotethemottoratheraskfor
forgivenessthanpermission.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.3.5 Keepmanagementdecisionscrystalclearwhilealsoempoweringand
rewardingthebottomupcultureofcontinuousimprovementandhuman
creativityandentrepreneurship.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.4 Expectandsupportpeopleastheystriveforprofessionalexcellenceandpromotetheir
careers.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
Examples:
To staff a contract designed to support a Program Management Office (PMO) at the Center for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC), a recognized government contracting organization hired a skilled project
manager who had earned a PhD in epidemiology. The work in the PMO focused this managers attention
on detailed analysis and reporting and portfolio management efforts that spanned many of CDCs Centers,
Institutes and Offices, but did not tap the project managers knowledge and skill as an epidemiologist.
Fearing that her background in epidemiology would go unused for an extended period, she was
encouraged to speak with the leaders of the internal universitythe education and training group within
the consulting organization. From that initial contact, this project manager designed, developed, and
delivered a six-week class in epidemiology that has become one of the most in-demand classes held
within the company. The class had a standing waiting list of more than 20 for each of the six-week
sessions. She has now reached a number of her colleagues who also work on CDC contracts through their
participation in the class, providing insight that ultimately improves their understanding of their own work
and subsequently their performance on the job. From this, she has received numerous commendations
from the organizations executive leadership, has been recognized and published in the organizations
internal news publication, holds a position as co-lead of an epidemiology practice area within the
organization, and is now a recognized company-wide expert in epidemiology.
The Prairie Waters program reports how they fostered professional excellence regarding behavior. Not
only did they clearly communicate what behavior was expected, but they asked their management to serve
as role models for these behavioral characteristics.
Rockwell Collins University was created to help enhance career development opportunities at the
company. Rockwell Collins University is organized into eight schools that align to core business functions.
Each school has a school owner, school lead, and a school planning team to prioritize new course
development and course offerings. Learning and Development supports each School within Rockwell
Collins University as a learning subject matter expert. Learning and Development provides a learning
infrastructure to manage and promote employee career development in their current and/or future role
development associated with performance reviews. Learning and Development partners with the Rockwell
39
Collins University school planning teams to develop and deploy learning solutions that support and drive
business goals and objectives.
The sense of striving for professional excellence at Toyota is considered fundamental for achieving highperformance processes. Toyota managers are trained to be mentors and view every engineering project
and program as an opportunity for developing its engineers. New engineers are paired with a mentor. They
are assigned an improvement project (freshman project), which is small but technically challenging. During
the project, they learn the Toyota way of engineering.
The 14-X research and development program of the Brazilian Air Force, targeted at developing a new
hypersonic vehicle, took a novel approach at mentoring young and new experts, engineers, and scientists
in the program. They were actively supported in identifying research areas within the scope of the program
that had a high personal relevance to them in the pursuit of their long-term career goals. This generated a
new level of commitment throughout the technical and scientific community of the program and furthered
the program goals as well as everyones personal aspirations.
Subenablers:
1.4.1 EstablishandsupportCommunitiesofPractice.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
1.4.2 Investinworkforcedevelopment.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
1.4.3 EnsuretailoredLeantrainingforallemployees.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
1.4.4 GiveleadersatalllevelsindepthLeantraining.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
1.4.5 Promoteandhonorprofessionalmeritocracy.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
1.4.6 Establishahighlyexperiencedcoregroup(grayhairs)thatleadsbyexample
andinstitutionalizespositivebehavior.
40
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: All
10: Acquisition
Practice
1.4.7 Perpetuateprofessionalexcellencethroughmentoring,friendlypeerreview,
training,continuingeducation,andothermeans.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
1.5 Promotetheabilitytorapidlylearnandcontinuouslyimprove
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
Examples:
As part of its IT Service Management (ITSM) improvement program, a major financial institution
established special initiatives to facilitate the effective transfer of tacit knowledge between program and
operations teams so that processes previously requiring skilled employees could be automated for greater
efficiency. Joint problem-solving sessions, case study based workshops and learning by observation have
been used as main primary techniques for knowledge gathering.
The Haradh and Hawiyah Gas Plant programs reported that in their programs, younger employees were
trained on the job through extensive mentoring by more experienced colleagues. They furthermore ensured
knowledge transfer on a wider scale by continuously sharing lessons learned between project teams.
In the Trojan Reactor program, shortcomings in the skillsets of the team were initially identified, and
customized training on these topics was offered.
The program management of the Quartier International de Montreal program devised a unique project
execution approach. They divided the workload into smaller packages and used some of them as pilots for
testing management techniques and contract awards. If proven successful, these would be rolled out on a
wider scale; if not, management would adjust and test a different technique in the next pilot.
Subenablers:
1.5.1 Promoteandrewardcontinuouslearningthrougheducationandexperiential
learning.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
1.5.2 Provideeasyaccesstoknowledgeexpertsasresourcesandformentoring,
including"friendlypeerreview."
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.5.3 Valuepeoplefortheunconventionalideastheycontributetotheprogram
withmutualrespectandappreciation.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
41
1.5.4 Captureandsharetacitknowledgetostabilizetheprogramwhenteam
memberschange.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
1.5.5 Developstandardspayingattentiontohumanfactors,includinglevelof
experienceandperceptionabilities.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
1.5.6 Immediatelyorganizequicktraininginanynewstandardtoensurebuyinand
awareness.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.6 Encouragepersonalnetworksandinteractions
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
Examples:
The Newmont TS Power Plant program held informal dinner meetings off-site with the program
management of all companies involved in the program. These meetings supported the sharing of concerns
and thoughts about the program in a more comfortable environment.
The Dallas Cowboys Stadium program followed a similar approach. They occasionally organized informal
gatherings for lunch or larger celebrations to motivate employees and increase team bonding.
Rockwell Collins supports networks and interactions through a Knowledge Management strategy. The KM
vision is Accelerate Knowledge. Create Value. Goals include connecting people to people, building a
global and inclusive knowledge-sharing environment, making knowledge integrated, simple, relevant, and
flexible, and creating, capturing, using, and re-using knowledge.
Subenablers:
1.6.1 Preferphysicalteamcolocationtothevirtualcolocation.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
1.6.2 Forvirtuallycolocatedteams,investtimeandmoneyupfronttobuild
personalrelationshipinfacetofacesettings.

42
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 5.1
10: Acquisition
Practice
1.6.3 Promotedirecthumancommunicationtobuildpersonalrelationships.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.6.4 Engageinboundaryspanningactivitiesacrossorganizationsintheenterprise
(e.g.valuestreammapping).
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
1.6.5 Engageandsustainextensivestakeholderinteractions.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.6.6 Supportthedevelopmentofinformalandsocialnetworkswithintheprogram
andtokeystakeholdersintheprogramenvironment.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.6.7 Encourage(anddocumentwhenappropriate)openinformationsharing
withintheprogram.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
1.6.8 Programmanagermusthaverespectandpersonalrelationshipwithallfour
mainstakeholdergroups:customers,superiors,programemployeesandkey
contractors/suppliers.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1

43
5.2
LeanEnablers2.x:MaximizeProgramValue(LeanPrinciple1)
2. LeanEnablerstoMaximizeProgramValue(LeanPrinciple1)
2.1 Establishthevalueandbenefitoftheprogramtothestakeholders.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
Examples:
The specific research benefits that each of the major stakeholders in the U.S. Department of Energys
multi-billion dollar National Ignition Facility would receive was formally defined in a multilaboratory
agreement at the program initiation. This initial agreement allowed each stakeholder to better oversee the
evolving design and to more clearly define their needs prior to the start of detailed design and construction.
For the Deepwater program, it is reported that, initially, the value to the Coast Guard was defined
according to three overarching goals: (1) maximize operational effectiveness, (2) minimize total cost of
ownership, and (3) ensure customer satisfaction, which includes the operational commanders, aircraft
pilots, cutter crews, maintenance personnel, and other users.
Similarly the Prairie Waters program defined 11 outcomes in the very early stage, defining the value of the
program.
Across a dozen U.S. Department and Agency IT programs it was found that the stakeholders invariably
agreed on the program overarching goal. But each stakeholder had a different detailed definition of
success that was closely aligned with their organizational mission (performance for the operational user,
net-ready key performance parameters for offices responsible for interoperability, maintenance for logistics
centers, and policy and process compliance for acquisition authorities). Each stakeholder tried to move the
program closer to its definition of success by bringing to bear their influences and resources (end-user
legitimacy, funding). Successful programs viewed themselves as embedded in a supply web of conflicting
forces in which they continuously managed and balanced the needs and expectations of the different
stakeholders. Less successful programs saw themselves as middlemen in a one-dimensional supply chain
(goods and services in one direction, compensation in the other) with the other stakeholders being
distractions or impediments to the supply chain.
Subenablers:
2.1.1 Definevalueastheoutcomeofanactivitythatsatisfiesatleastthree
conditions:
a.Theexternalcustomerstakeholdersarewillingtopayforvalue.
b.Transformsinformationormaterialorreducesuncertainty.
c.Providesspecifiedprogrambenefitsrightthefirsttime.
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes

44
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 4.1
10: Acquisition
Practice
2.1.2 Definevalueaddedintermsofvaluetothecustomerstakeholdersandtheir
needs.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
2.1.3 Developarobustprocesstocapture,develop,anddisseminatecustomer
stakeholdervaluewithextremeclarity.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
2.1.4 Proactivelyresolvepotentialconflictingstakeholdervaluesandexpectations,
andseekconsensus.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
2.1.5 ExplaincustomerstakeholderculturetoProgramemployees,i.e.thevalue
system,approach,attitude,expectations,andissues.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
2.2 Focusallprogramactivitiesonthebenefitsthattheprogramintendstodeliver.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
Examples:
The Prairie Waters program had 11 very clearly defined benefits it aimed to achieve. The core program
was solely focused on these outcomes. All additional activities had to undergo review and approval. This
practice ensured that the team did not get carried away with side projects that did not add value.
A project in a large semiconductor device manufacturer in the communications sector was continuously
stressed regarding resources and, as a result, was one of the lower-performing projects in a wireless
network processor development program. To define the projects role in obtaining the program benefit
targets, the program manager clearly communicated the linkage between the projects schedule
performance with its effect on program performance. The behavior of the project team towards innovative
recovery of the project was renewed. The result was a significant improvement in schedule, reduction of
risk, and a doubling of program revenue contribution related to that project.
Subenablers:
2.2.1 Allprogramactivities,includingcommunicationsandmetrics,mustbefocused
ontheintendedoutcomesoftheprogramtheprogramsplannedbenefits.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
45
2.2.2 Alignprogramresourcestoachieveplannedbenefitsandincorporate
activitiesthatwillenablethebenefitsachievedtobesustainedfollowingthe
closeoftheprogram.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
2.2.3 Ensureprogramstaffandteamsfullyunderstandhowprogramexecutionand
benefitsrelatetohighlevelorganizationalgoals(e.g.,competitivenessand
profitability).
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
2.3 Frequentlyengagethestakeholdersthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
Examples:
Having a difficult standing in the surrounding population, the Fernald Feed Nuclear Cleanup program,
through extensive communication efforts, managed to calm the community. The community was not only
worried about the handling of radioactive material, but also the loss of jobs due to the plant closure. The
program included holding public meetings and establishing a citizens advisory board to give locals a voice
in the cleanup process.
An Obeya room is constantly used at Ford Motor for sharing information about the current and future
state of a program during its life cycle. The information on the walls is highly visual, making it possible for
anyone that walks in to understand the status of the program. The Ford CEO has stated that he prefers
visiting the Obeya room more than reviewing mind-numbing slide decks and reports.
A U.S. government program delivered a collection of software components to perform sophisticated
planning, execution, and assessment of operations. Because the end users had a compelling and
immediate operational need, the program office saw its job as twofold: interact with the users to ensure
satisfaction and diminish the effects of other stakeholders pull on resources. The former was achieved by
allocating a large fraction of program office resources to engage with end users. The latter was achieved
by interacting with the other stakeholders so they understood the pressing need enough to get them vested
in the end-user outcome. In this way, the success of the end-user outcome became more likely.
During the planning for a complex program that would bring together three separately developed components
of what would ultimately become an integrated Management Information Systems (MIS) platform for a
government agency, the program manager carefully planned stakeholder communications. As part of the
stakeholder engagement plan, the program manager established information/action meetings specifically
designed the meet the needs of different stakeholder groups. During program planning stages, there were
weekly steering committee meetings for the programs sponsors; for executive management, monthly
progress updates and demonstrations; and for executive staff, finance, and operations, bi-weekly governance
meetings that ensured proper policies and practice were in place and being followed for the program. While
these stakeholders were engaged and actively participating in the work, the program was seen as successful,
moving forward and was hailed as an example of a properly managed program effort. When (some)
46
stakeholders were unable to participate regularly, although the program teams activity remained constant,
program progress slowed and the perception of the quality and completeness of the work was questioned.
When the absent stakeholders were re-engaged, the program was again seen in a positive lightproving to
the program manager and team the importance and need for active stakeholder engagement for the initiative.
Subenablers:
2.3.1 Everyoneinvolvedintheprogrammusthaveacustomerfirstspirit,focusing
ontheclearlydefinedprogramvalueandrequirements.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
2.3.2 Establishfrequentandeffectiveinteractionwithinternalandexternal
stakeholders.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
2.3.3 Pursueaprogramvisionandarchitecturethatcapturescustomerstakeholder
requirementsclearlyandcanbeadaptivetochanges.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.3
2.3.4 Establishaplanthatdelineatestheartifactsandinteractionsthatprovidethe
bestmeansfordrawingoutcustomerstakeholderrequirements.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
2.3.5 Structurecommunicationamongstakeholders(who,howoften,andwhat).
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
2.3.6 Createsharedunderstandingofprogramcontent,goals,status,andchallenges
amongkeystakeholders.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
2.3.7 Communicateaccomplishmentsandmajorobstacleswithstakeholders
regularlyandwithtransparency.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
47
2.3.8 Buildtrustandhealthyrelationshipswithstakeholdersbyestablishingopen
communicationandearlyengagementwiththeprogramplanningand
execution.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
2.3.9 Listentothestakeholderscommentsandconcernspatientlyandvaluetheir
viewsandinputs.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
2.3.10 Clearlytrackassumptionsandenvironmentalconditionsthatinfluence
stakeholderrequirementsandtheirperceptionofprogrambenefits.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
2.3.11 Useprogramcomponentselectionandreviewwiththekeystakeholdersasan
opportunitytocontinuouslyfocustheprogramonbenefitsdelivery.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
2.4 Develophighqualityprogramrequirementsamongcustomerstakeholdersbefore
biddingandexecutionprocessbegins.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
Examples:
The Haradh Gas Plant program set ambitious schedule goals. To facilitate meeting these goals, critical
equipment such as the control system was procured during the frontend engineering phase. To ensure
compatibility with the suppliers work, procurement of these parts was completed before the bidding
process, and the resulting requirements regarding compatibility were included in the bidding documents.
Another programFernald Feed Nuclear Cleanupwas bound to federal regulations. Since the cleanup
had to be done according to the acceptable level of contamination set by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, the end state was well known. Hence, the requirements in the contract were very
concrete and tight.
Subenablers:

48
2.4.1 Assurethatthecustomerlevelrequirementsdefinedintherequestfor
proposal(RFP)orcontractsaretrulyrepresentativeoftheneed;stable,
complete,crystalclear,deconflicted,freeofwastefulspecifications,andas
simpleaspossible.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.4.2 Useonlyhighlyexperiencedpeopleandexpertinstitutionstowriteprogram
requirements,RFPsandcontracts.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.4.3 Ifthecustomerlackstheexpertisetodevelopclearrequirements,issuea
contracttoaproxyorganizationwithtoweringexperienceandexpertiseto
sortoutandmaturetherequirementsandspecificationsintheRFP.Thisproxy
mustremainaccountableforthequalityoftherequirements,including
personalaccountability.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.4.4 Preventcarelessinsertionofmutuallycompetingandconflicting
requirements,excessivenumberofrequirements,standards,andrulestobe
followedintheprogram,mindless"cutandpaste"ofrequirementsfrom
previousprograms.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.4.5 Minimizethetotalnumberofrequirements.Includeonlythosethatare
neededtocreatevaluetothecustomerstakeholders.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.4.6 Insistthatasinglepersonisinchargeoftheentireprogramrequirementsto
assureconsistencyandefficiencythroughout.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1

49
2.4.7 Requirepersonalandinstitutionalaccountabilityofthereviewersof
requirementsuntiltheprogramsuccessisdemonstrated.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.4.8 Alwaysclearlylinkrequirementstospecificcustomerstakeholderneedsand
tracerequirementsfromthistopleveltobottomlevel.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.4.9 Peerreviewrequirementsamongstakeholderstoensureconsensusvalidity
andabsenceofconflicts.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.4.10 Requireanindependentmandatoryreviewoftheprogramrequirements,
conceptofoperation,andotherrelevantspecificationsofvalueforclarity,
lackofambiguity,lackofconflicts,stability,completeness,andgeneral
readinessforcontractingandeffectiveprogramexecution.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.4.11 Clearlyarticulatethetoplevelobjectives,value,programbenefitsand
functionalrequirementsbeforeformalrequirementsorarequestforproposal
isissued.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.4.12 Useacleardecisiongatethatreviewsthematurityofrequirements,thetrade
offsbetweentoplevelobjectives,aswellasthelevelofremaining
requirementsrisksbeforedetailedformalrequirementsorarequestfor
proposalisissued.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.5 Clarify,derive,andprioritizerequirementsearly,often,andproactively.
50
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 5.1
10: Acquisition
Practice
Examples:
The Haradh Gas Plant program reports how early scope definition and a meticulous management of
changes led to a low change order rate of less than 2% that ultimately helped controlling costs.
Several software development companies create the feature breakdown structure (FBS) to describe the
product architecture. FBS serves as an instrument of communication between consumers and the
development team and also identifies a "reservation" of features in which the iteration plan will be
developed.
Subenablers:
2.5.1 DevelopanAgileprocesstoanticipate,accommodate,andcommunicate
changingcustomerrequirements.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.2
2.5.2 Followupwrittenrequirementswithverbalclarificationofcontextand
expectationstoensuremutualunderstandingandagreement.Keepthe
recordsinwriting,sharethediscusseditems,anddonotallowrequirements
creep.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
2.5.3 Usearchitecturalmethodsandmodelingtocreateastandardprogramsystem
representation(3DintegratedCAEtoolset,mockups,prototypes,models,
simulations,andsoftwaredesigntools)thatallowinteractionswithcustomers
andotherstakeholdersasthebestmeansofdrawingoutrequirements.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.3
2.5.4 Listenforandcaptureunspokencustomerrequirements.
Performance Domain:
Governance
Strategy
Alignment
Challenge Theme:
1: Firefighting
2: Requirements
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
2.5.5 Toalignstakeholders,identifyasmallnumberofprimarygoalsandobjectives
thatrepresenttheprogrammission,howitwillachieveitsbenefits,andwhat
thesuccesscriteriawillbetoalignstakeholders.Repeatthesegoalsand
objectivesconsistentlyandoften.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All

51
2.5.6 Activelypromotethematurationofstakeholderrequirements,e.g.,by
providingdetailedtradeoffstudies,feasibilitystudiesandvirtualprototypes.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
2.5.7 Facilitatecommunicationbetweendifferentandpossiblydiverging
stakeholderstodevelopasharedunderstandingoftheprogramamongthe
stakeholders,clearlyidentifyingandincorporatingthevariousinterestsof
differentstakeholders(aligned,indifferent,oropposed),andestablishtrust.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
2.5.8 Createeffectivechannelsforclarificationofrequirements(e.g.,involving
customerstakeholdersinprogramteams).
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4,1
2.5.9 Failearlyandfailoftenthroughrapidlearningtechniques(e.g.,prototyping,
tests,simulations,digitalmodels,orspiraldevelopment).
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.3
2.5.10 EmployAgilemethodstomanagenecessaryrequirementschange,andmake
theprogramdeliverablesrobustagainstthosechanges.Makebothprogram
processesandprogramdeliverablesreusable,reconfigurable,andscalable26.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
2.6 Activelyminimizethebureaucratic,regulatory,andcomplianceburdenontheprogram
andsubprojects.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
Examples:
A major aerospace company business unit established a formal program to reduce the administrative
burden on first line leaders (which also supports its respect for people strategy). The program includes
training on workflow management for workgroups, efficient and effective e-mail management, meeting
management, people development, and problem solving tools.

26
SeeSection6.1foradetaileddiscussionofAgileDevelopmentanditsrelationshiptoLeanThinkingandtheLeanEnablers.
52
The Deepwater program used a formal, fairly bureaucratic process for approvals of revisions to the
programs overall baseline with decisions made on the Coast Guard Vice Commandant level. However, for
lower-level decisions, this process was bypassed and decisions were made at the program level.
Subenablers:
2.6.1 Strivetominimizeandstreamlinetheburdenofpaperworkforexternal
stakeholdersbyactivelyengagingthemintheprocessandclearlyarticulating
andaligningthebenefitgeneratedbyeachreport.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
2.6.2 Minimizeandstreamlinetheprograminternalreportingforprogramactivities
andsubprojectsbyoptimizingtheinternalreportingrequirements.Only
requirereportsthatareclearlynecessaryandalignreportingrequirementsto
reduceredundantreporting.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 8.1
2.6.3 Ensureallreviewandapprovalstepsaretrulyneededandvalueaddinginthe
program.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 8.1
5.3
LeanEnablers3.x:OptimizetheValueStream(LeanPrinciple2)
3. LeanEnablerstoOptimizetheValueStream(LeanPrinciple2)
3.1 Mapthemanagementandengineeringvaluestreamsandeliminatenonvalueadded
elements.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
Examples:
A large aerospace company effectively used program startup integration events with the program team to
develop high-level value stream maps of the program. These events ensured concurrence from all
program leaders on the value proposition to the customer, the precedence of major value-adding tasks
aligned with the customer milestones, responsibility/accountability/authority for each major task, and
revelation of knowledge gaps, issues, and areas of uncertainty that needed to be resolved.
During a process called chartering, the Prairie Waters program team developed a delivery or value stream
map, exploring the path to achieving the program goals. Within that system, each workflow was broken
down on a process level assigning responsibilities, defining the format of the task output, and assessing
the time available for completion.
53
Subenablers:
3.1.1 Plantodeveloponlywhatneedstobedeveloped.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.1.2 Promotereuseandsharingofprogramassets.Utilizestandards,standard
processes,modulesofknowledge,technicalstandardizationandplatforms,
andsoftwarelibraries.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.3
3.1.3 Havecrossfunctionalstakeholdersandprogramleadershipworktogetherto
buildtheagreedvaluestream.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.1.4 Useformalvaluestreammappingmethodstoidentifyandeliminate
managementandengineeringwaste,andtotailorandscaletasks.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 8.1
3.2 Activelyarchitectandmanagetheprogramenterprisetooptimizeitsperformanceasa
system.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.3
Examples:
The Coast Guard in the Deepwater program chose a system-of-systems acquisition strategy. Instead of
replacing older equipment with new in a series of individual acquisitions, the older assets were replaced in
a single program by an integrated set of modern equipment. For that purpose, the Coast Guard awarded
a contract for providing capabilitiesnot concrete assetsto a systems integrator. The systems integrator
had the freedom to translate the required capabilities to the asset level while striving for three overarching
goals: (1) maximize operational effectiveness, (2) minimize total cost of ownership, and (3) ensure
customer satisfaction.
An organization within a federal agency initiated a project to coordinate analysis and testing at laboratory
facilities located across the United States. To improve the overall accuracy and timeliness of information
reported by the laboratories, the project was focused on the standardization of coding and information
management techniques used to record and analyze samples tested at all locations. The project was a
success, though the organization found it difficult to sustain the improvements across the network of
laboratories. Local policies and personnel turnover affected the work at each laboratory and caused the
coordination of practice as well as the accuracy and timeliness of reported information to deteriorate. To
address this problem, the organization looked into root causes and determined that a number of activities
54
related to communications among the laboratoriespolicy monitoring, compliance, and decision making
were contributors. To correct these issues and to focus new attention on improving and sustaining
improvements for many laboratory functions, the organization repositioned the initiative within the
organization and expanded its scope to become a program. This expanded program-centered approach
includes project and nonproject activities, such as: (1) specialized projects targeted at activities within the
laboratories, (2) communications efforts to support alignment among the laboratories, (3) a governance
process that supports coordinated decision making, and (4) a benefits management plan that ensures
activities are in place for monitoring benefits, managing efforts to achieve them, planning transition
activities to sustain them, and a review process to refocus specific efforts based on environmental
changes. The program enables the organization to view all activities affecting the laboratories as a
coordinated whole and is viewed as a model for similar action across the organization.
Subenablers:
3.2.1 Keepactivitiesduringearlyprogramphasesinternalandcolocated,asthereis
ahighneedforcoordination.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.3
3.2.2 Setupasingle,colocatedorganizationtohandletheentiresystems
engineeringandarchitectingfortheentireeffortthroughoutthelifecycle,in
ordertoincreaseRAA.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.3
3.2.3 Ensurethatsystemsengineeringandarchitectingareacentralpartof
programmanagementandnotoutsourcedorsubcontracted,asthese
activitiesrequireahighlevelofcoordination.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.3
3.2.4 Developaclearvisionandholisticviewofthefuturestateofyourprogram
enterprise,includingfutureportfolioofproducts,includingboththefuture
organizationaswellasthefuturevaluestream.Provideguidanceonaclear
pathforwardandensurethatresourcesarealignedwiththisvision.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.3
3.2.5 Useacleararchitecturaldescriptionoftheagreedsolutiontoplancoherent
program,engineering,andcommercialstructures.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
55
3.2.6 Changetheprogrammindsettofocusontheentireprogramenterpriseand
thevalueitdeliverstocustomerstakeholders.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.2.7 Leadandsustainthetransformationtoanintegratedprogrammanagement
andsystemsengineeringenterpriseacrosscustomerandsupplier
organizations.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
3.2.8 Insistonadoptinganadaptivearchitecturethatmeetstheoperationalneeds,
whilenotcateringtoanyproprietarytechnologiesorcapabilitiesofpotential
contractors.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process:4.3
3.3 Pursuemultiplesolutionsetsinparallel.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process:4.3
Examples:
A few programs report that they pursued multiple solution sets in parallel. For example, the Prairie Waters
program evaluated 50 alternative approaches in parallel, narrowing them down according to a set of
criteria such as delivery schedule, cost, ability to receive approval for federal and state permits,
community support, and ability to implement criteria.
The Dallas Cowboys Stadium considered various sites for the stadium before agreeing on the final
location. Also, the design continuously evolved from a set of alternatives that were narrowed down
stepwise according to budget and schedule impacts.
This enabler also aligns with analyses of alternatives (AoA) to identify the most promising way of
satisfying its mission needs, which was started over a decade ago by the U.S. Department of Defense.
Early AoA typically compared only life cycle costs, but the process was quickly expanded to include
multiple measures of effectiveness and became a common element of Department of Defenses
acquisition system.
Subenablers:
3.3.1 Plantoutilizecrossfunctionalteamsmadeupofthemostexperiencedand
compatiblepeopleatthestartoftheprojecttolookatabroadrangeof
solutionsets.
56
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 5.1
10: Acquisition
Practice
3.3.2 Explorethetradespaceandmarginsfullybeforefocusingonapointdecision
andtoosmallmargins.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.3
3.3.3 Forkeydecisions,explorealternativeoptionsinparallelaslongasfeasible.
Forexample,usethemethodofsetbasedconcurrentengineering.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.3
3.3.4 Exploremultipleconcepts,architectures,anddesignsearly.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.3
3.3.5 Exploreconstraintsandperformrealtradesbeforeconvergingonapoint
design.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.4
3.3.6 Allotherthingsbeingequal,selectthesimplestsolution.27
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.4
3.4 Ensureupfrontthatcapabilitiesexisttodeliverprogramrequirements.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
Examples:
In an initiative to improve the organizational project management maturity of its businesses, a U.S.
division of Siemens Industry utilized Managing Successful Programmes (MSP) to define a blueprint of
future-state capabilities needed to deliver the program vision and benefits. Organizational project
management maturity assessments were used to help define the gaps between the current and desired
future-state capabilities.

27
Einsteinsaid:Anyintelligentfoolcanmakethingsbigger,morecomplex,andmoreviolent.Ittakesatouchofgeniusandalotof
couragetomoveintheoppositedirection.
57
Subenablers:
3.4.1 Ensurestrongcorporate,institutional,andpersonalaccountabilityand
personalpenaltiesfor"lowballing"thebudget,schedule,andrisk,and
overestimatingcapabilities(e.g.,thetechnologyreadinesslevels(TRL))in
ordertowinthecontract.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
3.4.2 If"lowballing"isdetectedonafixedpricecontract,insistoncontinuingthe
fixedpricecontract,orprogramterminationandrebid.Donotallow
switchingtocostplus.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
3.4.3 Ensurethatplannersandcostestimatorsareheldresponsiblefortheir
estimatesduringtheexecutionoftheprogram.Minimizetheriskofwishful
thinking.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
3.5 Frontloadandintegratetheprogram.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
Examples:
Early, up-front identification of potential problems allowed the management of the Haradh Gas Plant
program to create workarounds and contingency plans to prevent these problems.
A member of the management team of the QIT-Fer et Titane program claimed that frontloading was
crucial to a successful program execution and said, "The better you capture everything in the early stage,
the better the project is defined."
Subenablers:
3.5.1 Planearlyforconsistentrobustnessandrightthefirsttimeunder"normal"
circumstances,insteadofherobehaviorinlater"crisis"situations.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.5.2 Upfrontintheprogram,dedicateenoughtimeandresourcestounderstand
whatthekeyrequirementsandintendedprogrambenefitsreallyare.
58
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 5.1
10: Acquisition
Practice
3.5.3 Establishasystemandprocessthatallowscomprehensive,effective,and
efficientupfrontplanningofprogrambeforeexecutionbegins.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.5.4 Theprogramleadershipteam(programmanager,technicalmanagers,lead
systemengineersetc.)mustidentifykeystakeholdersthatwillbeinvolved
throughouttheprogramlifecyclebeforetheprogramexecutionbegins.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.5.5 Holdaprogramkickoffmeetingwithkeystakeholdersthatidentifiesthe
programbenefitsandthekeymechanismstorealizethesebenefits(e.g.,
valuestreammapping);identifyandassignrolesandresponsibilities,identify
keydependenciesandrisksinprogram,setkeymilestones,andestablishan
actionplan.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.5.6 Propagatefrontloadingofprogramthroughoutcriticalsubprojectswith
similarworkshopstothosedescribedin3.5.5.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
3.5.7 Ascertainwhatisavailabletotheprogram(resources,talent,budget,and
timeline)andwhatisnotavailablepriortomakingcommitmenttothe
customersandotherstakeholders.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.5.8 HoldLeanAcceleratedPlanningsessionsattheprogramlevelandforkey
subprojects,engagingallstakeholdersindevelopingmasterschedule,value
streammap,risksandopportunities,keyassumptions,andactionitems.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1

59
3.5.9 Forallcriticalactivities,definewhoisresponsible,approving,supporting,and
informing(alsoknownasRACImatrix),usingastandardizedtool,paying
attentiontoprecedenceoftasks,anddocumentinghandoffs.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
3.5.10 Transitionthefrontloadingoftheprogramandkeyprojectsintoa
continuousplanningandimprovementprocesswithregularworkshops.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.5.11 Anticipateandplantoresolveasmanydownstreamissuesandrisksasearly
aspossibletopreventdownstreamproblems.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
3.5.12Includeadetailedriskandopportunityidentification,assessment,and
mitigationintheearlyprogramplanningphases.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
3.5.13 Ensurethattechnicalchallengeswithintheprogramareadequately
addressedbymanagementstaffduringtheplanningprocess.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.5.14 Programmanagermustpersonallyunderstand,clarify,andremove
ambiguity,conflicts,andwastefromkeyrequirementsandexpectationsat
theprogramstart.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.1
3.5.15 Heavilyinvolvethekeysuppliersinprogramplanningandattheearlyphases
ofprogram.
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes

60
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 5.1
10: Acquisition
Practice
3.6
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
Examples:
Due to the complexity of the Deepwater program, the Coast Guard used a computer simulation model to
project the operational efficiency of a variety of asset mixes in different scenarios. The model took a
variety of factors into account. It was based on historical data on which probabilistic estimates are based.
Before using it, the model was reviewed by different institutions known as authorities in the field of
simulation modeling.
This enabler also aligns with recommendations by the United States Government Accountability Office
(GAO). It encourages the use of probabilistic cost and schedule estimates in their Cost Estimating and
Assessment Guide. The goal is to use information with a realistic probability distribution, so that
management can quantify the level of confidence in achieving a program within a certain funding level and
can determine a defensible amount of contingency reserve to quickly mitigate risk.
Subenablers:
3.6.1 Developprobabilisticestimatesforcost,schedule,andothercriticalplanning
forecasts.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.6.2 Baseyourplanningassumptionsonconfidenceintervals,notonpoint
estimates.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.7 Workwithsupplierstoproactivelyavoidconflictandanticipateandmitigateprogram
risk.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
Examples:
The Hawiyah Gas Plant program reported early and close collaboration with its three main contractors.
Ensuring a certain standardization between the work packages of the three main contractors should
mitigate the risk system integration.
In a different programthe Dallas Cowboys Stadiumthe suppliers were involved in the very early cost
estimation. In a bottom-up approach, the suppliers helped to develop an accurate depiction of the final
costs.
The importance of supplier meetings is stressed at Ford in order to align expected outcomes between
organizations. Obeya rooms may be opened for supplier visits, leading to intense and fruitful discussions.
Through this process, suppliers can also be prioritized, preferred, or abandoned. Some suppliers became
partners and enablers of Fords lean transformation.
61
Subenablers:
3.7.1 Permitoutsourcingandsubcontractingonlyforprogramelementsthatare
perfectlydefinedandstable.Donotsubcontractearlyprogramphaseswhen
theneedforclosecoordinationisthestrongest.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
3.7.2 Havethesuppliersbrieftheprogrammanagementteamoncurrentand
futurecapabilitiesduringconceptualprogramphases.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
3.7.3 Engagesuppliersearlyintheprogramtoidentifyandmitigatecritical
supplierrelatedrisks.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
3.7.4 Respectyourextendednetworkofpartnersandsuppliersbychallenging
themandhelpingthemimprove.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
3.7.5 Streamlinesupplychainprocessesandfocusonjustintimeoperationsthat
minimizeinventorycarryingcosts.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
3.7.6 Whendefiningrequirementsetsformultiplesuppliers,ensurethattheyare
independentofeachother,inordertominimizeriskandreducetheneedto
managedependenciesamongsuppliers.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process:
3.7.7 Communicatetosupplierswithcrystalclarityallexpectations,includingthe
contextandneed,andallproceduresandexpectationsforacceptancetests,
andensuretherequirementsarestable.
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes

62
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 6.2
10: Acquisition
Practice
3.7.8 Selectsupplierswhoaretechnicallyandculturallycompatible.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
3.7.9 Strivetodevelopaseamlesspartnershipbetweensuppliersandtheproduct
developmentteam.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
3.7.10 Includeandmanagethemajorsuppliersasapartofyourteam.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
3.711 Invitesuppliersastrustedprogrampartnerstomakeaseriouscontributionto
systemsengineering,design,anddevelopment.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
3.7.12 Trustengineerstocommunicatewithsuppliers'engineersdirectlyfor
efficientclarification,withinaframeworkofrules,butwatchforhighrisk
itemswhichmustbehandledatthetoplevel.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
3.8 Planleadingindicatorsandmetricstomanagetheprogram.28
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.7
Examples:
In 2001, the United Nations introduced a results-based management system in an attempt to more closely
link activity with results. Now a key element for all United Nations development program initiatives (most
of them involving several international and local organizations) is program performance assessment,
which is based on common metrics and consistent high-level classification. The premise is that if
organizations plan in terms of the results they expect to achieve and then verify that they have achieved
them, then resources will be used effectively and public support will be maintained.
The Prairie Waters program agreed on a set of critical success factors, such as budget, schedule,
environmental protection, and proactive communication, that were continuously tracked and displayed in a

28
ForadetailedlistofleadingindicatorsthatcanbeusedinSystemsEngineering,pleasesee:Roedler,G.,Rhodes,D.,Schimmoller,H.
andJones,C.(2010).SystemsEngineeringLeadingIndicatorsGuide,Version2.0.Availableathttp://seari.mit.edu/documents/SELIGuide
Rev2.pdf
63
dashboard making the current status highly visible. These top-level metrics were broken down for every
bidding package to track contractors performance.
Also in the Haradh Gas Plant, program performance was tracked. The program defined schedule, cost,
quality, and safety as critical success factors. In addition, the program initiated a quality index that measures
a contractors compliance with quality requirements such as documentation, manning levels, or qualification.
Subenablers:
3.8.1 Useleadingindicatorstoenableactionbeforerisksbecomeissues.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.7
3.8.2 Focusmetricsaroundcustomerstakeholdervalueandprogrambenefits.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.7
3.8.3 Useonlyafewsimpleandeasytounderstandmetricsandsharethem
frequentlythroughouttheenterprise.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.7
3.8.4 Usemetricsstructuredtomotivatetherightbehavior.Beverycarefulto
avoidtheunintendedconsequencesthatcomefromthewrongmetrics
incentivizingundesirablebehavior.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
3.8.5 Useonlythosemetricsthatmeetastatedneed,objective,orprogram
benefit.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
3.9 Developanintegratedprogramscheduleatthelevelofdetailforwhichyouhave
dependableinformation.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
Examples:
A master schedule was developed early in the Prairie Waters program. It contained start and completion
dates for the ten major construction contracts. As the program evolved, the master schedule was
completed using more detailed schedules of the milestones within the contracts.
The BAA Heathrow program utilized a rolling planning approach. In this program, the schedule was
64
refined as a 5-week look-ahead.

Subenablers:
3.9.1 Createaplantoappropriatelyintegrateandalignprogrammanagement,
systemsengineering,andotherhighlevelplanningandcoordination
functions.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.9.2 Maximizeconcurrencyofindependenttasksandtasksthatinformeachother.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.9.3 Synchronizeworkflowactivitiesusingschedulingacrossfunctions,andeven
moredetailedschedulingwithinfunctions.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.9.4 Planbelowfullcapacitytoenableflowofworkwithoutaccumulationof
variability,andpermitschedulingflexibilityinworkloading(i.e.,have
appropriatecontingenciesandschedulebuffers).29
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.9.5 Planforlevelworkflowandwithprecisiontoenablescheduleadherenceand
driveoutarrivaltimevariation.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.9.6 Carefullyplanforprecedenceofengineeringandmanagementtasks(which
tasktofeedwhatothertaskswithwhatdataandwhen),understandingtask
dependenciesandparentchildrelationships.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1

29
Queuingtheoryshowsthattheflowapproaching100%ofcapacityslowsdownasymptoticallyduetotheaccumulationofvariability,
evenintheabsenceofbottlenecks.
65
3.9.7 Updatedetailedplanningregularlytoreflectnewinformation,being
consistentwiththelongtermstrategicplan.Donotforceprogramsto
executeagainstadetailed,outdatedplanthatwasdevelopedbasedon
incompleteinformation.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.10 ManagetechnologyreadinesslevelsandprotectprogramfromLowTRLdelaysandcost
overruns.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
Examples:
The U.S. Department of Energy established formal policy guidance on the preferred level of technology
readiness at each stage of program and project development in order to avoid schedule delays and cost
overruns. Technology readiness levels are now tracked and are a major consideration in all critical
decisions on a projects or programs readiness to proceed to the next phase of development, resulting in
increased program performance.
The Haradh Gas Plant program relied on new technologies. To mitigate the risk of schedule overrun that
was perceived with these technologies, the management team froze the process design at a certain point
in time and allowed for no further changes.
Subenablers:
3.10.1 Createtransparencyregardingthetechnologyrisksandassociatedcostand
schedulerisksbeforelargescaleprogramsarecontracted.Issuesmallcontracts
tomaturecriticaltechnologiesbeforestartingalargescaleprogram.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
3.10.2 Instituteclearguidelinesfortechnologymaturationandinsertionprocessin
yourprogram.Clearlydefinewhattypeandleveloftechnology,cost,and
scheduleriskisacceptableunderwhatcircumstances(paralysisbyanalysis
vs.programfailure).
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
3.10.3 Fullyunderstandboththerisksandopportunitiesinvolvedintheuseof
new/immaturetechnologiesandnewengineering/manufacturingprocesses.
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
66
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 5.4
10: Acquisition
Practice
3.10.4 Utilizeprogrammanagementstrategiesthatproducethebestbalance
betweentechnologyriskandrewardinyourprogram,suchasevolutionary
acquisition,incremental,orspiraldevelopment.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
3.10.5 Extensivelyuseriskmanagementtoacceptappropriatelevelsoftechnology
riskandensuresufficientmitigationactionsareinplace.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
3.10.6 Removeshowstoppingresearchandunproventechnologyfromcriticalpath
oflargeprograms.Issueseparatedevelopmentcontracts,staffwithcolocated
experts,andincludeitinriskmitigationplan.Reexamineforintegrationinto
programaftersignificantprogresshasbeenmadeordefertofuturesystems.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
3.10.7 Providestablefundingfortechnologydevelopmentandmaturation.Thiswill
supportasteady,plannedpipelineofnewtechnologiestobeinsertedinto
theprogram.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
3.10.8 Matchtechnologiestoprogramrequirements.Donotexceedprogramneeds
byusingunnecessarilyexquisitetechnologies("goldplating").
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
3.10.9 Performrobustsystemarchitectingandrequirementsanalysistodetermine
technologyneedsandcurrenttechnologyreadinesslevels.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.2
3.10.10Ensureclear,programwideunderstandingofagreedupontechnologiesand
technologystandards.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All

67
3.10.11Utilizeindependenttechnicalreviewstoconfirmacapabilitytodeliverand
integrateanynewtechnologythatcoulddelaytheprogramorcauseschedule
overruns.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
3.11 Developacommunicationsplan.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
Examples:
The Prairie Waters program not only developed internal communication protocols, having a very diverse
stakeholder group, they also followed a set of communication plans for various stakeholder groups. The
plans established included an overall communications plan, media relations plan, crisis communication
plan, and a comprehensive community outreach plan. Furthermore, a program manual was designed
covering communication flows and protocols outlining rules for information dissemination and quality.
Subenablers:
3.11.1 Developandexecuteaclearcommunicationplanthatcoverstheentirevalue
streamandstakeholders.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
3.11.2 Plantousevisualmethodswhereverpossibletocommunicateschedules,
workloads,changestocustomerrequirements,etc.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1

5.4
LeanEnablers4.x:CreateProgramFlow(LeanPrinciple3)
4. LeanEnablerstoCreateProgramFlow(LeanPrinciple3)
4.1 Usesystemsengineeringtocoordinateandintegrateallengineeringactivitiesinthe
program.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
Examples:
The Coast Guard in the Deepwater program chose a system-of-systems acquisition strategy. Instead of
replacing older equipment with new in a series of individual acquisitions, the older assets were replaced in
a single program by an integrated set of modern equipment. For that purpose they awarded a contract of
68
providing capabilitiesnot concrete assetsto a single main contractorthe systems integrator. The
systems integrator had the freedom of translate the required capabilities to the asset level while striving for
three overarching goals: (1) maximize operational effectiveness, (2) minimize total cost of ownership, and
(3) ensure customer satisfaction.
Another government program provided a single function with high technology and expensive parts to a
small community of users. The government program office team assumed full responsibility for architecting
and overseeing development of the system capability. The government system engineering team had
sufficient knowledge and expertise and was able to save money by clarifying what the contractor was to do
and what it should cost.
Subenablers:
4.1.1 Seamlesslyandconcurrentlyengagesystemsengineerswithallengineering
phasesfromthepreproposalphasetothefinalprogramdelivery.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
4.1.2 Maintainteamcontinuitybetweenphasestomaximizeexperientiallearning,
includingpreproposalandproposalphases.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
4.2 Ensureclearresponsibility,accountability,andauthority(RAA)throughouttheprogram
frominitialrequirementsdefinitiontofinaldelivery.30
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
Examples:
A staffing matrix chart kept track of all responsibilities in the Dallas Cowboys Stadium program. It was
used as a tool to assign responsibility based on individual skills.
In the Prairie Waters program, a program manual was developed. It served as a guidebook for individuals
to outline standard procedures as well as roles and responsibilities for key tasks.
A U.S. government program to develop an information infrastructure and a product line of plug-in modules
tailorable to different users set up a well-defined RACI subset of stakeholders for each decision point,
product delivery, or task, even setting standards for how the different groups should work together. This
was such an important ingredient to their success that it became a major task of the integration contractor
to maintain it.
Subenablers:

30
ThetermprogrammanagerisusedinthisandthesubsequentenablersasdefinedinSection3.1.
69
4.2.1 Nominateapermanent,experiencedprogrammanagerfullyresponsibleand
accountableforsuccessoftheentireprogramlifecycle,withcomplete
authorityoverallaspectsoftheprogram(businessandtechnical).
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
4.2.2 Ensurecontinuityintheprogrammanagerpositionandavoidpersonnel
rotation.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
4.2.3 DefineandclearlycommunicatetheprogrammanagersRAAacrossall
stakeholders.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
4.2.4 Holdpeopleresponsiblefortheircontributionsthroughouttheprogramlife
cycle.Upstreamactivitiesmustbeheldresponsibleforissuestheycausein
downstreamactivities.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
4.2.5
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
Inthetoplevelprogrammanagementteamanddecisionmaking,thedifferent
roles(e.g.,businessandtechnical)mustexhibitahighlevelofteamwork,
understanding,andappreciationofthenecessitiesineachother'sdomain.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
4.2.6 Developaprocesstoensurethetimelyandflawlesscoordination,interface,
andhandoff(ifneeded)ofRAAamongrelevantprogramstakeholdersand
executionteamsthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.1
4.3 Foreveryprogram,useaprogrammanagerroletoleadandintegratetheprogramfrom
starttofinish.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
Examples:
A large aerospace company analyzed its program performance data and found a very strong correlation
between program success and consistency of leadership from the proposal through the program execution
70
phases. Program leaders who were part of the proposal effort carried forward the knowledge and
assumptions that were made during the proposal, and also represented skin in the game during the
proposal activity, meaning they had an important stake in the outcome of the program.
In the Trojan Reactor program, the management team and the program manager were comprised of a
very experienced team that was selected because of their technical competence and experience in similar
programs. They were engineers by training and had additional project management training.
Subenablers:
4.3.1 Groomanexceptionalprogrammanagerrolewithadvancedskillstoleadthe
development,thepeople,andassureprogramsuccess.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
4.3.2 Ensurethattheprogrammanagerpossessesanappropriatebackground
regarding:business,generalmanagement,andengineeringexperience;
leadershipandpeopleskills;andexperienceworkingonhighlytechnical
engineeringprograms.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
4.3.3 Ensurethatthecompetency,technicalknowledge,andotherrelevantdomain
knowledgeoftheprogrammanagerandtheotherkeymembersofthe
programteamareonparwiththetechnicalcomplexityoftheprogram.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
4.3.4 Ensurethattheprogrammanagerhasclarityovertheimpactoftechnical,
requirement,andscopechanges(forexamplebycleartraceabilityof
requirementsandeffectiveuseofchangemanagementcontrolboards).
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
4.4 Thetoplevelprogrammanagement(e.g.,programmanagementoffice)overseeingthe
programmustbehighlyeffective.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
Examples:
The Mozal Smelter as well as the Trojan Reactor program relied heavily on experienced personnel in the
program management team. In both programs, the majority of the program members were recruited from
previous successful programs.
Every engineer at Toyota recognizes the engineering skill, leadership skill, and dedication it takes to
become a chief engineer. This merits a high level of respect and compels every engineer to support the
71
chief engineer, who is mostly assigned to lead the project by focusing on technical issues and horizontal
cross-functional group facilitation.
Subenablers:
4.4.1 Programmanagementstaffturnoverandhiringratesmustbekeptlow.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
4.4.2 Investheavilyinskillsandintellectualcapital;engagepeoplewithdeep
knowledgeoftheproductandtechnology.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
4.4.3 Maximizecolocationopportunitiesforprogrammanagement,systems
engineering,businessleadershipandotherteamstoenableconstantclose
coordination,andresolveallresponsibility,communication,interface,and
decisionmakingissuesupfrontearlyintheprogram.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
4.5 Pursuecollaborativeandinclusivedecisionmakingthatresolvestherootcausesof
issues.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
Examples:
A large aerospace company established a standard five-step problem-solving method based on the plando-check-act cycle (PDCA) which helps to assure that the problem is adequately defined, root causes are
identified, multiple solutions are proposed and evaluated, solutions are implemented and monitored, and
the gains are sustained through performance monitoring. The root cause step includes various tools such
as 5-why analysis to assure that the solutions address causes and not symptoms.
In the Prairie Waters program, a number of actions were taken to ensure efficient decision making. In a
series of chartering workshops at the beginning of the program, the foundations for efficient decision
making throughout the program were set. Furthermore, the organizational structure was adapted not only
to foster collaboration but also to speed up decision making. Lastly, it was ensured that the right
information required to make decisions is available and up to date.
Subenablers:
4.5.1 Ifdecisionsarebasedonassumptionsthatarelikelytochange,keeptrackof
thoseassumptionsandadjustthedecisionswhentheychange.
72
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 5.3
10: Acquisition
Practice
4.5.2 Defineyourinformationneedsaswellastimeframefordecisionmaking.
Adjusttheneededinformationandanalysistoreflectthetimeyouhaveto
reachadecision.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
4.5.3 Takethetimenecessarytoreachgooddecisions.Alwaysexploreanumberof
alternatives.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
4.5.4 Neverdelayadecisionbecauseyouarenotwillingtotaketheresponsibility
orareafraidtodiscusstheunderlyingissues.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
4.5.5 Breakdowncomplexdecisionsintoindependentcomponentsasmuchas
possible.Donotbargainforpowerorstatus,butresolveeachbasedon
programandsystemrequirementsandconstraints.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
4.5.6 Ifyoucannotmakeadecisionforwhateverreason,keeptrackofitand
periodicallyreviewunmadedecisions.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
4.5.7 Defineaclear,streamlinedprocessforcriticaldecisionmaking,resolving
conflictsofinterest,andconvergingonconsensus.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
4.5.8 Problemsarecorrectedbythosewhocreatedthem,wheretheyoccur,andas
soonaspossible.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3

73
4.5.9 Makedecisionscarefullybyconsensus,maintainingclearresponsibility,
thoroughlyconsideringalloptions.Searchforsolutionstoissuesthatsatisfy
multiplestakeholderssimultaneously.Stakeholderinterestsmustconverge
overtime.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
4.5.10 Proactivelymanagetradeoffsandresolveconflictsofinterestamong
stakeholders.Donotignoreortrytoglossthemover.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
4.5.11 Ensurethatsystemdesign,organizationaldesign,contractdesign,risk
management,decisionmakingamongthestakeholders,metrics,and
incentivestructurearealignedtosupportthisongoinganddynamicdecision
makingprocess.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
4.6 IntegrateallprogramelementsandfunctionsthroughProgramGovernance
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.2
Examples:
After the acquisition of several independent companies in East Europe, a major utility company
established a Transformation Steering Committee as a governance board for major transformation
programs across all companies. The primary goal of this group was to review interim results from all critical
projects, provide active direction in regards of program risk management, and overall project and program
management activities.
The Deepwater and Prairie Waters programs reportedly established program oversight committees. It fell
within the committees responsibility to oversee the program planning and management as well as system
integration process.
Subenablers:
4.6.1 Ensureprogramgovernancehasfullview,control,andinfluenceoverthe
entireprogramtoeffectivelyguideandbalancetheprogramanditsindividual
componentsthroughoutitslifecycle.
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes

74
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 5.1
10: Acquisition
Practice
4.6.2 Employprogramsupportingprocessestointegrateprogramcomponentsfor
effectivedeliveryoftheprogramsbenefitsandoutcomes(e.g.,programrisk,
communication,andresourcemanagement).
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.2
4.6.3 Seekandmaintainindependentreviewsoftheprogram.Assignteamsoutside
oftheprogramtoobserveandassesstheexecutionandhealthofthe
program.Engagenonadvocatesinreviewprocess.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.2
4.6.4 Useagatedprocessforvalidatingplanningandexecutionofprogram,and
leveragefunctionalexpertiseatthesegates.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.2
4.6.5 Ensureintegrationbetweendifferenttopicaldomainsthroughoutthe
programlifecycle,e.g.,architecturedesign,software,andhardwaredesign.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
4.6.6 Alignincentivesacrosstheprogramenterprise.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
4.7 Useefficientandeffectivecommunicationandcoordinationwithprogramteam.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
Examples:
This example organization changed the communication of its projects with the project management office
(PMO). The same improvements would apply to the communication between projects and their program. Of
the 115 projects, 35 were being coordinated through the PMO which was established to provide support and
centralized reporting. The projects reporting to the PMO did not use common templates or tools for managing
their efforts or for reporting status, therefore the task of consolidating the information from these projects fell
to the PMO. This labor-intensive consolidation process consumed 1 week of each reporting period and limited
the PMOs ability to take on additional work. To simplify the process, the PMO developed a set of electronic
project tools and templates within a Microsoft SharePoint workspace and provided transition support and
training to any project leader interested in automating project tracking and reporting. The SharePoint tools
and templates were immediately welcomed by the project managers reporting information to the PMO. Many
75
acknowledged that the substantial reduction in overhead administration time. By automating and establishing
a set of common tools, templates, tracking, and reporting for these projects, the project managers directly
benefited. The PMO also saw a reduction in the monthly consolidation, preparation time, and effort for status
reportingultimately reducing the total preparation interval to less than 24 hours. This enabled the PMO to
take on additional projects within the organization, expanding the number reporting regularly to the PMO and
improving the overall accuracy and timeliness of the organizations operational decision-support information.
The Prairie Waters program implemented a very effective communication strategy across multiple
organizations in the enterprise. For each key organization, individual people were established as direct
points of contact between organizational and functional counterparts, which proved to be major facilitator
of direct and efficient communication and decision making.
At Ford, the program communication was streamlined. Informal meetings called "skip-level meetings" were
implemented in order to allow small groups of engineers the chance to discuss relevant issues directly with
leaders who were several levels above them in the hierarchy. These meetings promoted an effective way
to maintain a clear line of communication between leadership and the engineers.
Subenablers:
4.7.1 Captureandabsorblessonslearnedfromalmostallprograms.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
4.7.2 Maximizecoordinationofeffortandflow.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
4.7.3 Maintaincounterpartswithactiveworkingrelationshipsthroughoutthe
enterprisetofacilitateefficientcommunicationandcoordinationamong
differentpartsoftheenterpriseandwithsuppliers.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
4.7.4 Usefrequent,timely,open,andhonestcommunication.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
4.7.5 Promoteaflatorganizationtosimplifyandspeedupcommunication.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
4.7.6 Promotedirect,informal,andfacetofacecommunication.
76
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: All
10: Acquisition
Practice
4.8 Standardizekeyprogramandprojectelementsthroughouttheprogramtoincrease
efficiencyandfacilitatecollaboration.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
Examples:
In the QIT-Fer et Titane program, process standards were established to enable employees to work
concurrently.
The Prairie Waters program manual outlined standard workflows and procedures for key tasks.
Standardized work is one of the key differentiators of the Toyota engineering process. Rigorous design
standardization supports platform reusability. This allows Toyota to share critical components,
subsystems, and technologies across vehicle platforms, resulting in lower product cost and higher quality.
Toyota focuses on harmonizing design standardization, process standardization, and engineering skill-set
standardization.
A division of Siemens utilized organizational project management maturity models to help improve project
predictability and identify process improvement opportunities within a municipal transportation program.
Implementation of global standard best practices at the project and organizational levels enabled more
efficient and effective performance for the program.
Subenablers:
4.8.1 Standardizeprogrammanagementmetricsandreportingsystem.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
4.8.2 Identifyrepeatableprogrammanagementactivitiesandstandardizethem.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
4.8.3 Promotedesignstandardizationwithengineeringchecklists,standard
architecture,modularization,busses,andplatforms.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
4.8.4 Promoteprocessstandardizationindevelopment,management,and
manufacturing.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP

77
4.8.5 Promotestandardizedskillsetswithcarefultrainingandmentoring,rotations,
strategicassignments,andassessmentsofcompetencies.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
4.9 UseLeanThinkingtopromotesmoothprogramflow.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: All
Examples:
In the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics program, various tasks were strongly interrelated and could not run
in isolation. Frequent integration of these workflows helped turn the program into a smoothly running
machine.
Ford Motors recognized the opportunity to use the value-stream mapping events for enabling crossfunctional and external dialogues. These meetings proved to be an excellent opportunity to identify
interdependencies and understand the information flow required by each organizational unit in a program.
Subenablers:
4.9.1 Useformalfrequentcomprehensiveintegrativeeventsinadditionto
programmaticreviews:(a.)questioneverythingwithmultiplewhys;(b.)
alignprocessflowtodecisionflow;(c.)resolveallissuesastheyoccurin
frequentintegrativeevents;and(d.)discusstradeoffsandoptions.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
4.9.2 Bewillingtochallengethecustomer'sassumptionsontechnicaland
meritocraticgroundsandtomaximizeprogramstability,relyingontechnical
expertise.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
4.9.3 Minimizehandoffstoavoidrework.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
4.9.4 Optimizehumanresourceswhenallocatingvalueadded(VA)andrequired,
nonvalueadded(RNVA)tasks:(a.)useprofessionalstodovalueadding
professionalwork;and(b.)whenprofessionalsarenotabsolutelyrequired,
usenonprofessionals(supportstaff)todorequired,nonvalueaddingtasks.
78
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: ALL
10: Acquisition
Practice
4.9.5 Ensuretheuseofconsistentmeasurementstandardsacrossallprojectsand
databasecommonality.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
4.9.6 UseLeantoolstopromotetheflowofinformationandminimizehandoffs.
Implementsmallbatchsizesofinformation,lowinformationininventory,low
numberofconcurrenttasksperemployee,smalltasktimes,wide
communicationbandwidth,standardization,workcells,andtraining.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
4.9.7 UseminimumnumberofITtoolsandmakecommonwhereverpossible.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
4.9.8 Minimizethenumberofsoftwarerevisionupdates(e.g.,noncriticalupdates)
ofITtoolsandcentrallycontroltheupdatereleasestopreventinformation
churning.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
4.9.9 AdaptITtoolstofitthepeopleandprocess.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
4.9.10 AvoidexcessivelycomplexandoverlyfeaturerichITtools.Tailortoolsto
programneeds,nottheotherwayaround.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process:5.6
4.10 Makeprogramprogressvisibletoall.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
Examples:
A significant part of the integrated schedule management for the Salt Lake City Winter Olympic games
was preparing and updating the large wall posters that were distributed across all major office areas. Every
month, status updates and progress indicators about major projects, initiatives, and their
interdependencies were updated on the posters for everyone to see.
79
In order to continuously track the program progress the QIT-Fer et Titane program, utilized more
conventional technologies/mediums like face-to-face meetings, phone calls, and advanced technologies
for web conferences were utilized.
The QIT-Fer et Titane, Prairie Waters, and Dallas Cowboys Stadium programs used an online database
that was easily accessible and allowed for a quick overview of the program status.
Subenablers:
4.10.1 Makeworkprogressvisibleandeasytounderstandtoall,includingexternal
customer.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
4.10.2 Tracktheprogram'soverallprogresstodelivertheprogrambenefits.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
4.10.3 Utilizevisualcontrolsinpublicspacesforbestvisibility(avoidcomputer
screens).
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
4.10.4 Developasystemthatmakesimperfectionsanddelaysvisibletoall.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
4.10.5 Usetrafficlightsystem(green,yellow,red)toreporttaskstatusvisually
(good,warning,critical)andmakecertainproblemsarenotconcealed.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
4.10.6 Provideguidancetotheorganizationandsubprojectstoassesstheirlevelof
performanceandcontributiontotheoverallprogramsuccess.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
4.10.7 Alignprogrammetricswithintendedbenefitsandstakeholderexpectations.
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes

80
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 5.6
10: Acquisition
Practice
4.10.8 Establishclearlineofsightbetweenlowerlevelprogramandprojectmetrics
andtoplevelprogramsuccessmetrics.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
4.10.9 Developasnapshot/summaryrepresentationofthemeaningfulmetrics(e.g.,
standarddeck)tomeasureallphasesoftheprojectandprogramandmakeit
availabletoall.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
4.10.10TrackreductionofriskanduncertaintythroughoutprogramlifecycleasKPI.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
4.10.11Tracktheefficiencyandqualityoforganizationalinterfaceswithinthe
programenterprisewithKPIs.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6

5.5
LeanEnablers5.x:CreatePullintheProgram(LeanPrinciple4)
5. LeanEnablerstoCreatePullintheProgram(LeanPrinciple4)
5.1 Pulltasksandoutputsbasedonneed,andrejectothersaswaste.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 8.1
Examples:
In the QIT-Fer et Titan program, some significant engineering and construction activities were pulled,
based on specific needs. Activities were not simply started because of preplanned schedules, but also if
and when they were needed for following steps. In some cases, this also meant starting activities ahead of
schedule.
Compatibility before completion is a practice at Ford Motors where key technical challenges drive the
definition of subsystem interfaces. This is followed by a front-loaded development process that leads to a
synchronized development process with just-in-time knowledge flow.
Executives at a large data services company based in the Southeast complained regularly that detailed
reports designed to support decision making were failing to provide required critical decision-support
information in a clear, concise, and timely manner. The reports in question were standard hardcopy
financial, operations, and sales reports delivered to the executive team on a daily, weekly, monthly, and
81
quarterly basis. To resolve this, the senior vice president for Product Development contacted one of the
business lines PMO staff to ask for their help to improve the content and the quality of executive
management reporting. The small PMO team worked directly with the executives, beginning by
interviewing each executive. Two key questions were presented to identify the type and source of
information that the executive team required. Those questions were: (1) When you are out of the office
and find it necessary to take action on behalf of the company, what information do you need to guide your
decision making? and (2) When you arrive at your desk, what information do you typically access first in
order to begin work? From the answers to these questions, the PMO team designed an electronic
dashboard and visualization platform that eliminated approximately 60% of the hardcopy reporting
(including the time and effort required to prepare them) and presented product-based information through
hourly updates highlighting key sales activities, operational performance (exceptional highs and lows),
financial profile detail (with graphics), and KPI information. The near real-time information was designed to
be presented online and by the use of a rolling display in each executive office. Executives would be able
to access key information when they needed it, and would also have the ability to drill down into issues to
obtain details. Characterizing the program to others in the organization, one executive remarked: the
outstanding achievements seen for this project can be traced directly to the interviews, where the team
asked us the right questions to determine our needs. That well thought-out start contributes daily to the
efforts positive outcomes.
Subenablers:
5.1.1 Letinformationneedspullthenecessaryworkactivities.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
5.1.2 Promotethecultureinwhichpeoplepullknowledgeastheyneeditandlimit
thesupplyofinformationtogenuineusersonly.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
5.1.3 Traintheteamtorecognizewhotheinternalcustomer(receiver)isforevery
taskaswellasthesupplier(giver)toeachtaskuseaSIPOC(supplier,inputs,
process,outputs,customer)modeltobetterunderstandthevaluestream.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
5.1.4 Stayconnectedtothecustomerduringthetaskexecution.
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes

82
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: ALL
10: Acquisition
Practice
5.1.5 Promoteeffectiverealtimedirectcommunicationbetweeneachgiverand
receiverinthevalueflow,basedonmutualtrustandrespect,andensurethat
bothunderstandtheirmutualneedsandexpectations.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
5.1.6 Alsofornonroutinetasks,avoidreworkbycoordinatingtaskrequirements
withinternalcustomer.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
5.1.7 Whenpullingwork,usecustomerstakeholdervaluetoseparatevalueadded
fromwaste.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
5.2 Establisheffectivecontractingvehiclesintheprogramthatsupporttheprogramin
achievingtheplannedbenefitsandcreateeffectivepullforvalue.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
Examples:
In the Prairie Waters program, every contractor was incentivized to propose ideas to reduce costs. In
cases where the ideas proved valid and were selected for realization, the savings were split evenly.
Successful U.S. government IT program offices tended to organize their teams, contracts, and funding
sources/cost centers to match the layered and segmented nature of the technical enterprise. They
organized personnel into disjointed teams to separately acquire applications, services, infrastructure, and
data stores, etc. They aligned contracts to these separate activities and used the organization provided by
the technology to also harness the complexity in the business processes. Typically, separate engineering
teams were formed to deliver applications and infrastructure. These teams acted as product development
units with full responsibility for cost, schedule, design, and marketing of their piece of the system within the
context of the enterprise.
Subenablers:
5.2.1 Establishcommoncontractstructuresthroughouttheprogram.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1

83
5.2.2 Aligncontractsandincentivesthroughouttheprogramtofairlysharetherisk
andopportunitiesinherentintheprobabilisticestimates.Usethistoavoid
gamingofforecastsandcreatewinwinsituations.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.1
5.2.3 Ensurethatcontractssupportcompleteandopencommunicationbetween
theprogramstakeholders.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL

5.6
LeanEnablers6.x:PursueProgramPerfection(LeanPrinciple5)
6. LeanEnablerstoPursueProgramPerfection(LeanPrinciple5)
6.1 Makeeffectiveuseofexistingprogrammanagementandorganizationalmaturity
standards.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.2
Examples:
The Trojan Reactor management team compiled a program manual that was based on PMIs A Guide to
the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide) and added the teams experiences as a
reference for all programs in the organization.
Ford Motors developed Technical Maturity Models and individual technical development plans to
guarantee that their engineers were able to gain the appropriate level of technical excellence and maintain
ongoing technical development.
Subenablers:
6.1.1 Useexistingprogrammanagementstandards,guidelines,andapplicable
organizationalmaturitymodelstoyourprogramsbestadvantage.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.2
6.1.2 Focusonachievingtheprogrambenefitswhenselecting,customizing,and
implementingprogrammanagementstandards,guidelines,andmaturity
models.
84
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 5.2
10: Acquisition
Practice
6.1.3 Integrateimplementationprocesswithexistingprogramandbusiness
strategytoanoverallprogrammanagementandorganizationalmaturity
standard.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.2
6.1.4 Donotimplementanystandardpurelyforachievinganysortofmandated
programcertification.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 8.1
6.1.5 ReviewanduseexistingLeanbasedenterpriseandprogramselfassessment
toolstoquicklyidentifyweaknesses,goalsandtrackprogressontheprocess
improvementjourney.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.2
6.2 PursueLeanforthelongterm.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
Examples:
With a presence in more than 42 countries and a workforce of 74,000 business technologists, Atos started
a corporate Lean endeavor initially with the IT Services help desk for optimization of their consulting
services for healthcare. Based on initial results and customer feedback, the company now promotes
intensive Lean training and courses through the Atos Lean Academy both for corporate employees and
external clients.
Subenablers:
6.2.1 Developanintegrated,longtermapproachtoimplementLeanThinking
practicesinproductportfolioplanningandtheentireenterprise.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
6.2.2 SetupacentralizedLeanmanagementfunctionthatdevelopsageneralLean
managementprocessframeworkfortheenterprise,acentralrepositoryof
LeanmanagementmethodsandaLeanbusinesscasethattiesLeanpractices
toachievingtheprogrambenefits.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
85
6.2.3 SetupaLeanmanagementtraininginfrastructure:midlevelandproject
managersmusttrainandmotivatetheirteams.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: EPP
6.2.4 Createincentiveswithintheprogramandsubprojectsthatfosterthe
acceptanceofLeanpractices.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
6.2.5IntegratetheLeanactivitiesinprogrammanagementintoanoverallchange
managementandprocessimprovementapproachinordertoassure
sustainabilityoftheimprovementsandtousesynergieswithexistingprocess
improvementactivities.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
6.2.6 Startsmallbyselectingthemostbeneficialleanenablersforyourprogram.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
6.2.7 Codifylessonslearnedandevaluatetheireffectiveness.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
6.2.8 Lookfornewandinnovativewaystoworkthataddvalue.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
6.3 Striveforexcellenceofprogrammanagementandsystemsengineering.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
Examples:
The management of the Quartier International de Montreal program divided the workload into smaller
packages and used some of them as pilots for testing management techniques and contract awards. If
proven successful, these were rolled out on a wider scale. If the pilots were not successful, management
would adjust and test a different technique in the next pilot.
Improvement of organizational project management maturity at Siemens is conducted through the
86
utilization of multiple maturity models such as CMMI, OPM3, and others related to the various disciplines.
The structure of process maturity models drives standardization of recommended global practices, process
performance evaluation, and continuous improvement in the organization.
Subenablers:
6.3.1 Implementthebasicsofquality.31Donotcreate,passon,oracceptdefects.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
6.3.2 Followbasicproblemsolvingtechniques(e.g.,PlanDoCheckAct)andadopta
cultureofstoppingandpermanentlyfixingproblemswhentheyoccur.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
6.3.3 Promoteexcellenceunder"normal"circumstancesandrewardproactive
managementofrisks,insteadofrewarding"hero"behaviorincrisis
situations.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
6.3.4 Useandcommunicatefailuresasopportunitiesforlearningemphasizing
processandnotpeopleproblems.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
6.3.5 Treatanyimperfectionasanopportunityforimmediateimprovementand
lessontobelearned,andpracticefrequentreviewsoflessonslearned.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
6.3.6 Maintainaconsistent,disciplinedapproachtoprogrammanagementand
systemsengineering,includingagreementongoals,outcomes,processes,
communication,andstandardizingbestpractice.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL

31
Thebasicsofqualityinclude:(1)Buildrobustqualityateachstepoftheprocess,andresolveanddonotpassalongproblems;(2)Strive
forperfectionineachprocessstepwithoutintroducingwaste;(3)Donotrelyonfinalinspectionerrorproofwhereverpossible;(4)If
finalinspectionisrequired,pursue100%passratebyperfectingupstreamprocesses;(5)Movefinalinspectorsupstreamtotakeroleof
qualitymentors;(6)Applybasicplandocheckactmethodtoproblemsolving;and(7)Promoteacultureofstoppingandpermanently
fixingproblemsassoonastheybecomeapparent.
87
6.3.7 Promotetheideathattheprogramshouldincorporatecontinuous
improvementintheorganizationalculture.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
6.3.8 Pursuerefinementandexcellenceonlyifitcreatesadditionalvalueand
benefits.Avoidoverproductionandoverprocessingwaste.Ensurethatthe
processcanbeexecuted"rightthefirsttime"fromthenon.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
6.3.9 Useabalancedmatrix/projectorganizationalapproach.Avoidextremes,such
asisolatedfunctionalorganizationsandseparatedallpowerfulproject
organization.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
6.4 Uselessonslearnedtomakethenextprogrambetterthanthelast.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
Examples:
The U.S. Department of Energy established formal systems to collect and disseminate both project and
program lessons learned. The degree to which these lessons learned are being incorporated and
implemented is routinely checked. Lessons are now being collected from both internal and external
sources.
The Mozal Smelter program was able to use practices from a preceding successful program to a large
degree, replicating key functions and utilizing the same technologies. The process was facilitated by
transferring approximately 70% of the management team to the new program.
In a U.S. division of Siemens Industry, lessons learned were collected, but the responsibility for reviewing
and incorporating them was mostly the responsibility of the project teams. A division-level PMO was
established as part of the Business Excellence Department to collect and analyze lessons learned for
organizational improvements.
Subenablers:
6.4.1 Createmechanismstocapture,communicate,andapplyexperience.
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes

88
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: ALL
10: Acquisition
Practice
6.4.2 Clearlydocumentcontextof"bestpractices"and"keylearnings"inlessons
learnedtoallowevaluationofappropriatenessinnewprograms.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
6.4.3 Createaprocesstoregularlyreview,evaluate,andstandardizelessons
learnedandpreparethemforimplementation.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
6.4.4 Assignresponsibilityandaccountabilityforreviewing,evaluating,and
standardizinglessonslearnedandimplementtheresultingchange.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
6.4.5 Insistonstandardizedrootcauseidentificationandprocessforimplementing
correctiveactionandrelatedtraining.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
6.4.6 Identifybestpracticesthroughbenchmarkingandprofessionalliterature.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
6.4.7 Sharemetricsofperformanceofexternalpartnersbacktothemand
collaboratewiththemonimprovementsonbothsides.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 6.2
6.5 Usechangemanagementeffectivelytocontinuallyandproactivelyaligntheprogram
withunexpectedchangesintheprogramsconductandtheenvironment.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
Examples:
To control plan changes in the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics program, a formal change process was set
up:
(1)
(2)
(3)
A formal request was submitted to a centralized management and tracking group.

The change was evaluated for impact and quantified by the required funding.
A formal review of the change request was scheduled for the next available meeting with the
89
(4)
(5)
requestor, financier, and all impacted parties. At this review, the functional area director made a
case for the change.
Impacted functional areas approved or denied the request. If there was an impasse, the chief
operating officer would make the final decision.
The requestor would be notified in writing of the outcome of the review.
Subenablers:
6.5.1 Proactivelyaligntheprogramwithchangesintheenvironmenttokeep
focusedonachievingprogrambenefits:Redirect,replanorstopindividual
programcomponents.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 4.4
6.5.2 Establishaprogramchangemanagementprocessatthetoplevelthat
incorporatesallrelevantstakeholdersandprogramcomponents.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.3
6.6 Proactivelymanageuncertaintyandrisktomaximizeprogrambenefit32.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
Examples:
As a leading insurance organization in Canada, BCAA established a comprehensive Enterprise Risk
Management Framework as an integrated and consistent approach for identifying, analyzing, responding
to, and monitoring risks across all business areas and enterprise-level programs. This framework was not
only the starting point to classify and manage mutually dependent risks, but also an effective way to
identify new opportunities and instill a common risk language within the organization.
In the Prairie Waters program, a risk management plan was set up. It comprised risks identified by
experienced program managers and mitigation strategies. The potential impact of every risk was
determined to analyze the importance of the risk for the program. Based on the risk management plan, it
was the managers jobs to monitor and reevaluate the risks relevant to their area of responsibility and to
take mitigation actions if necessary.
Subenablers:
6.6.1 Focusprogramriskmanagementoncreatingandprotectingvalueforthe
program.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4

32
Foradditionaldetail,see:Olechowski,A.,Oehmen,J.,Seering,W.andBenDaya,M.:Characteristicsofsuccessfulriskmanagementin
productdesign.ProceedingsoftheInternationalDesignConferenceDESIGN12,Dubrovnik,Croatia.May2012
90
6.6.2 Createtransparencyregardingtheuncertaintiesaffectingtheprogram.
Understandanddocumentthekeyriskfactorsforprogramsandtheexisting
bestpracticestomanagethem.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
6.6.3 Supportallcriticaldecisionsintheprogramwithriskmanagementresults.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
6.6.4 Reduceprograminternaluncertaintiesandotheruncertaintiesthatcanbe
influencedtoamaximumdegree.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
6.6.5 Maketheprogramresilientagainstexternaluncertaintiesorother
uncertaintiesthatcannotbeinfluenced.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
6.6.6 Developsufficientriskmanagementskillsintheprogramandprovide
adequateresources.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
6.6.7 Tailortheriskmanagementprocesstothespecificprogramneedsand
integrateitwiththeoverallprogrammanagementprocess.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
6.6.8 Ensurethatriskmanagementactivitiescontributetocontinuous
improvementofprogrammanagementprocessesandtheorganizationofthe
programenterprise.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4

91
6.6.9 Regularlymonitorandreviewrisks,riskmitigationactions,andtherisk
managementsystem.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
6.6.10 Paycloseattentiontotheopportunitiesandcapturethemalongwithrisks.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.4
6.7 Striveforperfectcommunication,coordination,andcollaborationacrosspeopleand
processes.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
Examples:
The management of the Dallas Cowboys Stadium program developed a rule on e-mail correspondence to
avoid misunderstanding. The rule was that only one response per e-mail was allowed. Should further
follow-up be required, a phone call or personal meeting would replace further e-mail correspondence.
Ford Motors developed a meeting called "reflection events" as an opportunity for program teams to learn
by reflecting on performance at specific program milestones, prior to the program end. During the meeting,
an A3 report is developed in order to state the problems and promote the opportunity to get critical input
from the cross-functional team.
Subenablers:
6.7.1 Developageneralprogrampolicy/guideline/frameworkthatoutlines
expectationsregardingcommunication,coordination,andcollaboration.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
6.7.2 Useconciseonepageelectronicforms(e.g.,Toyota'sA3form)for
standardizedandefficientcommunication,ratherthanverboseunstructured
memos.Keepunderlyingdataasbackupincaseitisrequestedbythe
receiver.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: ALL
6.7.3 Similarly,useconciseonepageelectronicformsforefficient,realtime
reportingofcrossfunctionalandcrossorganizationalissues,forprompt
resolution.
92
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 5.3
10: Acquisition
Practice
6.7.4 Developaplanthatimplementsthepolicyandensuresaccountabilitywithin
theentireprogramteamincommunications,coordination,anddecision
makingmethodsattheprogrambeginning.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
6.7.5 Matchcommunicationcompetenceofpeoplewiththeirroleswhenstaffing
theprogram.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.4
6.7.6 Publishinstructionsforemaildistributions,instantmessaging,andelectronic
communications.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
6.7.7 Publishinstructionsforartifactcontentanddatastorage:centralcapture
versuslocalstorageandpaperversuselectronicstorage,balancingbetween
excessivebureaucracyandtheneedfortraceability.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.5
6.7.8 Publishadirectoryandorganizationchartoftheentireprogramteamand
providetrainingtonewhiresonhowtolocatetheneedednodesof
knowledge.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.1
6.7.9 Ensuretimelyandefficientaccesstocentralizeddata.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6
6.7.10 Developaneffectivebodyofknowledgethatiseasilyaccessible,historical,
searchable,andsharedbyteamandaknowledgemanagementstrategyto
enablethesharingofdataandinformationwithintheenterprise.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 5.6

93
6.8 Promotecomplementarycontinuousimprovementmethodstodrawbestenergyand
creativityfromallstakeholders.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
Examples:
The Fluor Power plant program set up a culture in which ideas for improvement were welcome by any one.
All ideas were collected and presented to the management team to assess the ideas value and decide
about required actions.
Improvement of organizational project management maturity at Siemens is conducted through the utilizing
multiple maturity models such as CMMI, OPM3, and others related to the various disciplines. The
structure of process maturity models drives standardization of recommended global practices, process
performance evaluation, and continuous improvement in the organization.
Subenablers:
6.8.1 Utilizeandrewardbottomupsuggestionsforsolvingemployeelevel
problems.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
6.8.2 Usequickresponsesmallteamscomprisedofprogramstakeholdersforlocal
problemsanddevelopmentofstandards.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
6.8.3 Useformal,largeimprovementprojectteamstoaddressprogramwide
issues.
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
8: Metrics
All Processes
9: Risk
Management
10: Acquisition
Practice
Process: 7.5
6.8.4 Defineaprocessthatimplementssuccessfullocalimprovementsinother
relevantpartsoftheprogram.
Governance
Challenge Theme:
INCOSE SE Process:
4: Technical
Processes

94
Strategy
Alignment
Performance Domain:
5: Project
Processes
Stakeholder
Engagement
3: Enterprise
Alignment
6: Agreement
Processes
Benefits
Management
4: Process
Integration
7: ProjectEnabling
Processes
Life Cycle
Management
5: Roles &
6: Competency
Responsibilities
8: Tailoring
Processes
Enterprise
Preparation
7: Planning
All Processes
8: Metrics
9: Risk
Management
Process: 7.5
10: Acquisition
Practice
6
ComplementaryApproachestoImprovethePerformanceofEngineering
Programs
Thereareanumberofotherapproachesandrecommendationsusedtoimprovetheperformanceof
engineeringprograms.Whileallhavetheirspecificobjectives,strengths,andweaknesses,theLeanEnablersare
compatible,complementary,andmaptoacertaindegreetotheseapproaches.Inthefollowing,wewill
brieflydiscussthreedifferentviewsasexamples:
x
x
x
6.1
Agiledevelopment,
Processmaturitymodels,suchasCapabilityMaturityModelIntegration(CMMI)and
Earnedvaluemanagement(EVM)
AgileDevelopment
LeanThinkingandAgiledevelopmentaretwodifferentbutcomplementaryconcepts.Thereisvaluein
recognizingthedifferencestoensurebothconceptscanworkinharmony.ThissectionfocusesonAgile
conceptsrelevanttothemanagementofprograms,whichisviewedasanenterpriseoperationalprocessthat
canveryoftenbenefitfromAgilecapability.
WhilemanyAgileprinciplesareaddressedandsatisfiedbytheLeanEnablers(seeTable7),theLeanEnablers
alsoincludetwospecificsubenablers,whichcallattentiontoAgile:
x
x
DevelopanAgileprocesstoanticipate,accommodate,andcommunicatechangingcustomer
requirements.(2.5.1)
EmployAgilemethodstomanagenecessaryrequirementschangeandmaketheprogramdeliverables
robustagainstthosechanges.Makebothprogramprocessesandprogramdeliverablesreusable,
reconfigurable,andscalable.(2.5.10)
6.1.1 TheBasisofAgile:TheAgileManifesto33
TheManifestoforAgileSoftwareDevelopmentdefinesthevaluesofAgile,aswellastheunderlyingprinciples.It
waswrittenforAgileSoftwareDevelopmentandhasstartedsimilarapproachesinotherdevelopmentand
engineeringdomains.
ThefourAgileValuesare:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Individualsandinteractionsoverprocessesandtools
Workingsoftwareovercomprehensivedocumentation
Customercollaborationovercontractnegotiation
Respondingtochangeoverfollowingaplan
ThetwelveAgilePrinciplesare:
1.
Ourhighestpriorityistosatisfythecustomerthroughearlyandcontinuousdeliveryofvaluable
software.
2.
Welcomechangingrequirements,evenlateindevelopment.Agileprocessesharnesschangeforthe
customer'scompetitiveadvantage.
3.
Deliverworkingsoftwarefrequently,fromacoupleofweekstoacoupleofmonths,withapreference
fortheshortertimescale.
4.
Businesspeopleanddevelopersmustworktogetherdailythroughouttheproject.

33
See:http://agilemanifesto.org/
95
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Buildprojectsaroundmotivatedindividuals.Givethemtheenvironmentandsupporttheyneed,and
trustthemtogetthejobdone.
Themostefficientandeffectivemethodofconveyinginformationtoandwithinadevelopmentteamis
facetofaceconversation.
Workingsoftwareistheprimarymeasureofprogress.
Agileprocessespromotesustainabledevelopment.Thesponsors,developers,andusersshouldbeable
tomaintainaconstantpaceindefinitely.
Continuousattentiontotechnicalexcellenceandgooddesignenhancesagility.
Simplicitytheartofmaximizingtheamountofworknotdoneisessential.
Thebestarchitectures,requirements,anddesignsemergefromselforganizingteams.
Atregularintervals,theteamreflectsonhowtobecomemoreeffective,thentunesandadjustsits
behavioraccordingly.
Table7:ASimpleComparisonofLeanandAgile
Fundamental
Concept
Lean Principle
Agile Manifesto
Values
Valuepeople
6. Respectthe
1. Individualsand 5. Buildprojectsaroundmotivatedindividuals.Givethem
peopleinyour
interactions
theenvironmentandsupporttheyneed,andtrust
program
overprocesses
themtogetthejobdone.
andtools
Understand
customer
value
1. Capturethe
valuedefined
bythe
customer
stakeholders
3. Customer
collaboration
overcontract
negotiation
Optimizeand 2. Mapthevalue 2. Working

softwareover
execute
streamand
comprehensive
processesto
eliminate
documentation
maximize
waste
customer
3. Flowthework 4. Respondingto
value
through
changeover
plannedand
followingaplan
streamlined
valueadding
stepsand
processes
4. Letcustomer
stakeholders
pullvalue
5. Pursue
perfectionin
allprocesses
96
Agile Manifesto Principles
1. Ourhighestpriorityistosatisfythecustomerthrough
earlyandcontinuousdeliveryofvaluablesoftware.
2. Welcomechangingrequirements,evenlatein
development.Agileprocessesharnesschangeforthe
customer'scompetitiveadvantage.
3. Deliverworkingsoftwarefrequently,fromacoupleof
weekstoacoupleofmonths,withapreferenceforthe
shortertimescale.
4. Businesspeopleanddevelopersmustworktogether
dailythroughouttheproject.
6. Themostefficientandeffectivemethodofconveying
informationtoandwithinadevelopmentteamisface
tofaceconversation.
7. Workingsoftwareistheprimarymeasureofprogress.
8. Agileprocessespromotesustainabledevelopment.The
sponsors,developers,andusersshouldbeableto
maintainaconstantpaceindefinitely.
9. Continuousattentiontotechnicalexcellenceandgood
designenhancesagility.
10.Simplicitytheartofmaximizingtheamountofwork
notdoneisessential.
11.Thebestarchitectures,requirements,anddesigns
emergefromselforganizingteams.
12.Atregularintervals,theteamreflectsonhowto
becomemoreeffective,thentunesandadjustsits
behavioraccordingly.
6.1.2ComparisonofLeanandAgile
Ultimately,itcanbearguedthatbothapproachesstrivetomaximizecustomervalue.Bothapproaches
emphasizetheimportanceofmaximizingcustomervalue,valuethepeopleexecutingtheprogram,andoptimize
theprogramprocesses(seeTable7Table).Table7alsoprovidesasimplemappingoftheLeanEnablerstothe
AgilePrinciplesandtheirrelatedprocessesinanAgileDevelopmentenvironment.
ThemostsignificantdifferencebetweenthetwoapproachesisthatwhileLeanThinkingstressesaclearupfront
definitionofcustomerneedsandrequirements,andoptimizesprocessesandorganizationtodeliverthatvalue,
Agilestressesresponsivenesstochangingcustomerrequirements.Leandoesnotforbidchangingcustomer
requirements,andAgiledoesnotabsolveanorganizationthatdoesnotunderstandcustomervalueproperly.
6.1.3ApplyingAgileDevelopmentinManagingEngineeringPrograms34
Agiledevelopmentcanbeoperationalizedinaprogrammanagementcontextbydoingthefollowing:
x
x
x
UseAgilemetricstoevaluateresponsestorequirementsuncertaintyandchange,
UseanAgileArchitecturetomaketheprogramandengineeringsystemresilienttorequirements
uncertaintyandchange,and
UseAgileDesignPrinciplestodeveloparesilientprogramorganizationandaresilientengineering
system
6.1.4AgileMetrics
Agilityisconcernedwiththeabilitytorespondeffectivelyunderrequirementsuncertainty.Effectiveresponses
canbeevaluatedbyfourconditions:
x
x
x
x
Timely(fastenoughtodelivervalue),
Affordable(atacostthatleavesroomforanROI),
Predictable(canbecountedontomeettheneed),and
Comprehensive(anythingandeverythingwithinthemissionboundary).
6.1.5AgileProgramandSystemArchitecture
AchievinggoodAgileresponsemetricsisenabledorhinderedbythearchitecture:theprogramandthesystem
beingdeveloped.Adraganddrop,plugandplayarchitecturefulfillsthisrequirement.Therearethreecritical
elementsinthearchitecture:
x
CatalogofEncapsulatedDragandDropModulesModulesareselfcontainedunitscompletewith
interfacesthatconformtotheplugandplaypassiveinfrastructure.Theycanbedraggedanddropped
intoasystemofresponsecapabilitywithrelationshipstoothermodulesconnectedthroughthepassive
infrastructure,andnotconnecteddirectlymoduletomodule.Modulesareencapsulatedsothattheir
interfacesconformtothepassiveinfrastructure,buttheirmethodsoffunctionalityareopaquetoother
modules.Newmodulescanbeaddedtomodulepoolsandnewpoolsofmodulescanbeadded
asynchronously.Modulepoolsprovidevariationanddiversityamongmodulesoftenwithduplicate
versionsofmodulesinapooltoenableincreasedfunctionalcapacityoflikemoduledeployment.
x CatalogofPassiveInfrastructureRulesandStandardsSometimescalledmiddlewareinITsystems,the
passiveinfrastructureprovidesdraganddropconnectivitybetweenmodules.Itsvalueisinisolatingthe
encapsulatedmodulessothatunexpectedsideeffectsareminimizedandoperationalfunctionalityis

34
Thisandthefollowingsubsectionsarebasedon:Dove,Rick:ResponseAbilityTheLanguage,StructureandCultureoftheAgile
Enterprise.Wiley,2001
97
rapid.Selectingpassiveinfrastructureelementsisacriticalbalancebetweenrequisitevarietyand
parsimonyjustenoughinstandardsandrulestofacilitatemoduleconnectivitybutnotsomuchto
constrainthemissionrequiredsystemconfigurations.Passiveinfrastructuretypicallyevolves,but
slowly,generallywhenmigrationtothenextgenerationcapabilityisappropriate.
ActiveInfrastructuretoSustainAgileOperationAnAgilesystemisnotsomethingdesignedand
deployedinafixedeventandthenleftalone.Agilityismostactiveasresponsiblepartiesassemblenew
systemconfigurationsinresponsetonewrequirementssomethingwhichmayhappenveryfrequently,
evendailyinsomecases.However,inorderfornewconfigurationstobeenabled,threemore
responsibilitiesarerequired:(1)thecollectionofavailablemodulesmustalwaysbewhatisneeded,(2)
themodulesthatareavailablemustalwaysbeindeployablecondition,and(3)thepassive
infrastructuremusthaveevolvedwhennewconfigurationsrequirenewstandardsandrules.
6.1.6 AgileDesignPrinciples
The10reusablereconfigurablescalabledesignprinciplesaddtothesubstanceofthearchitecture,layingdown
thegroundrulesfordesigninganAgilearchitectureandmodules:
ReusablePrinciples:
1.
2.
3.
SelfContainedUnits(Modules)Modulesaredistinct,separable,looselycoupled,selfsufficientunits
cooperatingtowardasharedcommonpurpose.
PlugCompatibility(FacilitatedInterfacing)Modulessharedefinedinteractionandinterfacestandards,
andareeasilyinsertedorremoved.
FacilitatedReuseModulesarereusableandreplicable,andresponsibilitiesarespecificallydesignated
forinventorymanagement,modulemaintenance,andupgradeofmoduleinventory.
ReconfigurablePrinciples:
4.
5.
6.
7.
PeerPeerInteractionModulescommunicatedirectlyonapeertopeerrelationship,andparallel
ratherthansequentialrelationshipsarefavored.
DistributedControlandInformationModulesaredirectedbyobjectiveratherthanmethod;decisions
aremadeatpointofmaximumknowledge;andinformationisassociatedlocally,accessibleglobally,and
freelydisseminated.
DeferredCommitmentModulerelationshipsaretransientwhenpossible,decisionsandfixedbindings
arepostponeduntilimmediatelynecessary,andrelationshipsarescheduledandboundinrealtime.
SelfOrganizationModulerelationshipsareselfdetermined,andmoduleinteractionisselfadjusting
orselfnegotiated.
ScalablePrinciples:
8.
9.
10.
6.2
EvolvingStandardsPassiveinfrastructurestandardizesintermodulecommunicationandinteraction;
definesmodulecompatibility;andismonitored/updatedtoaccommodateold,current,andnew
modules.
RedundancyandDiversityDuplicatemodulesproviderightsizingcapacityoptionsandfailsoft
tolerance,anddiversityamongsimilarmodulesemployingdifferentmethodsisexploited.
ElasticCapacityModulepopulationsmaybeincreasedanddecreasedwidelywithintheexisting
framework.
CapabilityMaturityModelIntegration(CMMI)
TheLeanEnablersalsomanifestthemselvesasrecommendationswithinotherglobalorganizationalbest
practicemodels.Manyoftheleanenablersthathavebeenidentifiedforengineeringprogramshavea
98
supportingbasisintheCapabilityMaturityModelIntegrated(CMMI)oftheSoftwareEngineeringInstitute(SEI)
aswellasprocessmaturitymodelsrelatedtoorganizationalprojectmanagementmaturitysuchasPMIs
OrganizationalProjectManagementMaturityModel(OPM3)ortheUKCabinetOfficeP3M3model.The
discussionofCMMI35servesasoneexampleofprocessmaturitymodels(seeFigure11).

Figure11:CharacteristicsofProcessMaturityLevelsTheExampleofCMMI
SupportoftheengineeringprogramenablersisexpectedspecificallywithinCMMIforDevelopmentasitisa
globallyrecognizedcapabilitymaturitymodelforengineeringbasedprojects.However,thefocusofCMMIisat
theprojectlevelinitiallyandattheorganizationallevelinhigherlevelsofmaturity.AlthoughCMMIisdirected
principallyattheprojectlevel,programspecificelementssuchasbenefitsmanagementandprogramlevel
stakeholdermanagementaresupportedbyCMMIprocesses,namelyRequirementsDevelopment(RD),
RequirementsManagement(RM)andIntegratedProjectManagement(IPM).Itshouldbenotedthatforan
organizationtobesuccessfulattheprogramlevel,itmustalsoexhibitsufficientcapabilitymaturityatthe
projectlevelaswellsincetheybuilduponandsupporteachotherscapabilities.SomeexamplesofCMMI
alignmentwiththeleanenablerfindingsinthisstudyaredescribedinthefollowingparagraphs.
Table8:MappingofLeanEnablerstoCMMIProcessAreas
CMMI Process Areas
CausalAnalysisand
Resolution
Configuration
Management
Supporting Lean Enabler for Managing Engineering Programs

4.5. Pursuecollaborativeandinclusivedecisionmakingthatresolvestherootcausesof
issues.
5.1. Pulltasksandoutputsbasedonneed,andrejectothersaswaste.
4.1. Usesystemsengineeringtocoordinateandintegrateallengineeringactivitiesinthe
program.
6.5. Usechangemanagementeffectivelytocontinuallyandproactivelyaligntheprogram

35
SoftwareEngineeringInstitute:CMMIforDevelopment,Version1.3,CMMIDEV,V1.3.TechnicalReport,CarnegieMellonUniversity,
2010.
99
CMMI Process Areas

DecisionAnalysisand
Resolution
IntegratedProject
Management
Measurementand
Analysis
OrganizationalProcess
Definition
Focus
Organizational
Performance
Management
100

3.10.ManagetechnologyreadinesslevelsandprotectprogramfromlowTRLdelaysand
costoverruns.
issues.
1.6. Encouragepersonalnetworksandinteractions.
3.5. Frontloadandintegratetheprogram.
3.9. Developanintegratedprogramscheduleatthelevelofdetailforwhichyouhave
3.11.Developacommunicationsplan.
4.2. Ensureclearresponsibility,accountabilityandauthority(RAA)throughoutthe
programfrominitialrequirementsdefinitiontofinaldelivery.
4.3. Foreveryprogram,useaprogrammanagerroletoleadandintegratetheprogram
fromstarttofinish.
4.6. IntegrateallprogramelementsandfunctionsthroughProgramGovernance.
4.7. Useefficientandeffectivecommunicationandcoordinationwiththeprogramteam.
6.7. Striveforperfectcommunication,coordination,andcollaborationacrosspeopleand
processes.
3.8. Planleadingindicatorsandmetricstomanagetheprogram.
4.10.Makeprogramprogressvisibletoall.
4.8. Standardizekeyprogramandprojectelementsthroughouttheprogramtoincrease
efficiencyandfacilitatecollaboration.
processes.
6.1. Makeeffectiveuseofexistingprogrammanagementandorganizationalmaturity
standards.
processes.
1.1. Buildaprogramculturebasedonrespectforpeople.
1.2. Motivatebymakingthehigherpurposeoftheprogramandprogramelements
transparent.
1.3. Supportanautonomousworkingstyle.
1.4. Expectandsupportpeopleastheystriveforprofessionalexcellenceandpromote
theircareers.
1.5. Promotetheabilitytorapidlylearnandcontinuouslyimprove.
1.6. Encouragepersonalnetworksandinteractions.
2.6. Activelyminimizethebureaucratic,regulatory,andcomplianceburdenonthe
programandsubprojects.
3.1. Mapthemanagementandengineeringvaluestreamsandeliminatenonvalueadded
elements.
3.2. Activelyarchitectandmanagetheprogramenterprisetooptimizeitsperformanceas
asystem.
3.6. Useprobabilisticestimatesinprogramplanning.
4.9. UseLeanThinkingtopromotesmoothprogramflow.
6.2. PursueLeanforthelongterm.
6.3. Striveforexcellenceofprogrammanagementandsystemsengineering.
6.8. Promotecomplementarycontinuousimprovementmethodstodrawbestenergyand
CMMI Process Areas

Performance
OrganizationalTraining
ProductIntegration
ProjectMonitoringand
Control
ProjectPlanning
ProcessandProduct
QualityAssurance
QuantitativeProject
Management
Requirements
Development

1.4. Expectandsupportpeopleastheystriveforprofessionalexcellenceandpromote
theircareers.
1.5. Promotetheabilitytorapidlylearnandcontinuouslyimprove.
1.6. Encouragepersonalnetworksandinteractions..
2.6. Activelyminimizethebureaucratic,regulatory,andcomplianceburdenonthe
programandsubprojects.
3.1. Mapthemanagementandengineeringvaluestreamsandeliminatenonvalueadded
elements.
3.2. Activelyarchitectandmanagetheprogramenterprisetooptimizeitsperformanceas
asystem.
4.9. UseLeanThinkingtopromotesmoothprogramflow.
5.1. Pulltasksandoutputsbasedonneed,andrejectothersaswaste.
6.2. PursueLeanforthelongterm.
6.8. Promotecomplementarycontinuousimprovementmethodstodrawbestenergyand
1.1. Buildaprogramculturebasedonrespectforpeople.
1.4 Expectandsupportpeopleastheystriveforprofessionalexcellenceandpromote
theircareers.
costoverruns.
program.
4.4. Thetoplevelprogrammanagement(e.g., programmanagementoffice)overseeing
theprogrammustbehighlyeffective.
3.7. Workwithsupplierstoproactivelyavoidconflictandanticipateandmitigateprogram
risk.
3.9. Developanintegratedprogramscheduleatthelevelofdetailforwhichyouhave
3.11.Developacommunicationsplan.
3.8. Planleadingindicatorsandmetricstomanagetheprogram.
issues.
2.1. Establishthevalueandbenefitoftheprogramtothestakeholders.
2.2. Focusallprogramactivitiesonthebenefitsthattheprogramintendstodeliver.
2.3. Frequentlyengagethestakeholdersthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.
2.4. Develophighqualityprogramrequirementsamongcustomerstakeholdersbefore
biddingandexecutionprocessbegins.
2.5. Clarify,derive,andprioritizerequirementsearly,oftenandproactively.
3.4. Ensureupfrontthatcapabilitiesexisttodeliverprogramrequirements.
program.
101
CMMI Process Areas
Requirements
Management
2.3. Frequentlyengagethestakeholdersthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.
2.5. Clarify,deriveandprioritizerequirementsearly,oftenandproactively.
program.
6.5. Usechangemanagementeffectivelytocontinuallyandproactivelyaligntheprogram
RiskManagement
risk.
6.6. Proactivelymanageuncertaintyandrisktomaximizeprogrambenefit.
SupplierAgreement
Management
risk.
5.2. Establisheffectivecontractingvehiclesintheprogramthatsupporttheprogramin
achievingtheplannedbenefitsandcreateeffectivepullforvalue.
TechnicalSolution
3.3. Pursuemultiplesolutionsetsinparallel.
costoverruns.
program.
Validation
program.
Verification
program.
GeneralPracticeGP2.7: 2.3. Frequentlyengagethestakeholdersthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.
Identifyandinvolve
risk.
relevantstakeholders
GeneralPracticeGP2.10: 4.4. Thetoplevel programmanagement(e.g., programmanagementoffice)overseeing
Reviewstatuswith
theprogrammustbehighlyeffective.
highermanagement
GeneralPracticeGP3.2: 6.4. Uselessonslearnedtomakethenextprogrambetterthanthelast.
CollectProcessRelated
Experiences
StakeholdermanagementissupportedbytheCMMIGenericPractice,IdentifyandInformRelevantStakeholders
(GP2.7),whichappliesuniversallytoallCMMIprocessareasinthemodel.Thedepthandextentofstakeholder
engagementisdeterminedbytheorganization.Inthiscase,thesamerecommendedpracticescouldextendto
theprogramaswellastheproject.
SystemsengineeringisacentralthemeoftheCMMIfordevelopmentmodelandisexpressedascomponent
areasoftheCMMIengineeringcategoryofprocesses.Processareasthatdirectlysupportexcellenceinsystems
engineeringrangethroughoutthedevelopmentlifecycleareRequirementsDevelopment(RD),Product
Integration(PI),TechnicalSolution(TS),Validation(VAL),andVerification(VER).Programbenefitsshouldbea
considerationfortheentirerequirementsdevelopment,management,andtraceabilityprocessforthe
componentprojectsandmayhavesignificantimpactswhenpartofRDandVAL.Elicitationofproject
requirementsthatareinalignmentwithprogrambenefitsoptimizationwilloftendeliveramoreeffective
enablingcapabilityfortheprogram.Controlandmanagementoftheengineeringproductorsystemsolutionis
withinthescopeofRequirementsManagement(RM)andConfigurationManagement(CM).Thethemeof
technologyreadinessandinsertioninengineeringprogramscanbesupportedbyProductIntegration(PI),
TechnicalSolution(TS)andbytheDecisionAnalysisandResolution(DAR)processareas,especiallyif
102
complementedbytoolssuchasatechnologyreadinessassessmentandatechnologymaturitydevelopment
process.
Optimizationofprogram,project,andorganizationalperformanceissupportedbyhighermaturityprocessareas
suchasOrganizationalProcessDefinition(OPD),OrganizationalProcessPerformance(OPP),Organizational
PerformanceManagement(OPM)andCausalAnalysisandResolution(CAR).Evaluationoforganizational
programandprojectperformanceandtheevaluationandselectionofimprovementopportunitiesdirectly
supporttheapplicationofworkstreamimprovementmethodologiessuchasLeanorSixSigma.However,itis
recommendedthatgoodpracticesrecommendedbyapplicablestandardsforeachdisciplinebeatsomelevelof
standardizedpracticeintheorganizationpriortotheimplementationofLean.Improvementofstandardized
processesprovidesgreaterleverageindeliveringlastingandsignificantorganizationalbenefits.Thisisthe
structureofmaturitymodels.
Anobservationisthattheprocessesareaswithnumericallygreaterlinkagetotheprogramleanenablers(e.g.,
OPM,OPP,IPM,RD)areassociatedwithhigherlevelsofmaturityintheCMMImodel.Itshouldalsobenoted
thattheweightedimpactofeachenablerisnotdefinedhere.However,onecouldpostulatethatan
organizationthatisengagedinengineeringbasedprogramswouldalsobenefitfromthehighermaturitylevels
ofCMMI.
Duetothecrossfunctionalnatureandcomplexityofengineeringprograms(e.g.,projects,programs,
engineering,suppliers,lifecyclesupportandacquisition),asinglematuritymodelorstandardisoftennot
sufficientduetotheirlimitedscope.Theutilizationofmultiplemodels,suchasCMMIinconcertwith
organizationalprojectmanagementmaturitymodelssuchasOPM3orP3M3,willservetocomplementeach
other.TheLeanEnablerswillsupportallofthosemodelsinanengineeringprogramenvironmentasan
organizationclimbsthematurityladder.
6.3
EarnedValueManagement(EVM)
6.3.1IntroductiontoEVM
EarnedValueManagement(EVM)isamanagementmethodologywhichintegratesaprogramstechnicalscope,
schedule,andresourceswithprogramriskinabaselineplan.36Againstthisplan,programprogressismeasured
toprovidemetricsthatindicateprogramperformancetrends.Themethodologyisoftenimplementedwithan
integratedsetofprocesses,peopleandtools,makingupwhatisknownasanEVMsystem.
Theapplicationofearnedvalueintheearlyinitiationandplanningphasesofaprojectincreasesthevalidityand
usefulnessofthecostandschedulebaselineandisanexcellentverificationoftheprojectscopeassumptions
andthescopebaseline.Onceestablished,thesebaselinesbecomethebestsourceforunderstandingproject
performanceduringexecution.Acomparisonofactualperformance(bothcostandschedule)againstthis
baselineprovidesfeedbackonprojectstatusanddata,notonlyforprojectingprobableoutcomes,butalsofor
managementtomaketimelyandusefuldecisionsusingobjectivedata37.
6.3.2TheEvolutionofEarnedValueManagementConcepts
TheearnedvalueconceptwasoriginallyadaptedtothemanagementofsingleprojectsbytheUnitedStatesAir
ForceontheirMinutemanMissileProgramintheearly1960s.Theconceptwasdevelopedfurtherforalmost40
years.In1998,theownershipofEVMSystemwastransferredfromtheUSGovernmenttoNDIAasa

36
Asdefinedin:ANSI/EIAStandard748B:EarnedValueManagementSystems(PublishedJune2007).
ProjectManagementInstitute,2012.Allrightsreserved.PermissiontouseanymaterialrelatedtoPMIsPracticeStandardfor
EarnedValueManagementSecondEdition,shouldberequestedfromProjectManagementInstitute.
37
103
representativeofprivateindustry.InJuly1998,theEarnedValueManagementSystembecameAmerican
NationalStandardsInstitute(ANSI/EIA)Standard748.38NDIAcreatedanumberofdocumentstosupportthe
applicationandimplementationofEVM,forexampletheEVMSystemsIntentGuideandEVMSystems
ApplicationGuide.39
ThesubjectofearnedvaluewasalsoadoptedbyPMIanddescribedinPMIsoriginalAGuidetotheProject
ManagementBodyofKnowledge(PMBOKGuide)andinsubsequenteditionsundertheCostManagement
KnowledgeAreatopic.InMarch2005,PMIreleasedtheThePracticeStandardforEarnedValueManagement
SecondEdition,40whichexpandsontheearnedvalueinformation.ThePMIstandarddefinesearnedvalue
managementasamanagementmethodologyforintegratingscope,schedule,andresources;forobjectively
measuringprojectperformanceandprogress;andforforecastingprojectoutcome.
6.3.3RelationshipofEVMtotheLeanEnablers
TheLeanEnablersworksynergisticallywithEVM.Ontheonehand,EVMaddressesthemajorchallengeswhen
managingengineeringprograms(seeSection4andTable9);ontheotherhandtheLeanEnablershelpto
implementEVMmoreeffectively(seeSection5andTable10Table).
Table9:RelationshipofengineeringprogramchallengesandEVM
10 Major Challenges in Engineering Programs
1: FirefightingReactiveProgramExecution
2: Unstable,unclear,andincomplete
requirements
3: Insufficientalignmentandcoordinationof
theextendedenterprise
4: Processesarelocallyoptimizednot
integratedfortheentireenterprise
5: Unclearroles,responsibilities,and
accountability
6: Mismanagementofprogramculture,team
competency,andknowledge
7: Insufficientprogramplanning
8: Impropermetrics,metricsystems,andKPIs
9: LackofproactiveProgramRiskManagement
10:Poorprogramacquisitionandcontracting
practices
Impact of EVM
EVMprovidesasystemfordisciplinedmanagementofcomplex
projects
EVM,throughtheorganizing,planning,andbudgeting,including
revisionsanddatamanagementguidelines,providesforclarification
ofrequirements
EVMprovidesclearmetricsthatspantheentireprogramandenables
aprogramtoimproveorganizationalalignmentandoverallprocess
optimization.
Seepreviouschallenge.
EVM,throughtheorganizingguidelines,providesforaclearstructure
oftheorganizationalbreakdownandassignedprogramscope.
NotdirectlyaddressedbyEVM.
EVMorganizing,planning,andbudgetingguidelinesdriveadiscipline
phasedapproachtoprogramplanning.
EVM,throughtheplanningandbudgetingandanalysisand
managementreportsguidelines,providesforclearprogrammatic
metricstiedtoperformance.
EVMsoveralldisciplinedapproachlinkswithriskmanagementfornot
onlyameasurementofpastperformance,butanunderstandingof
whatitwilltaketocompletetheprograminthefuture,includingthe
positiveornegativeuncertainties.
EVMdirectlycontributestoimprovingacquisitionandcontracting
practicesbyestablishingclearperformancebaselines.

38
ANSI/EIA748isreaffirmedeveryfiveyears,withthenextreleaseplannedfor2012.
Bothguidesandadditionalinformationcanbefoundatwww.ndia.org/pmsc
40
ProjectManagementInstitute,2012.Allrightsreserved.PermissiontouseanymaterialrelatedtoPMIsPracticeStandardfor
EarnedValueManagementSecondEdition,shouldberequestedfromProjectManagementInstitute.
39
104
OnewaytodescribeEVMpracticesinmoredetailistobreakthemdownintofivemajorareas(Organization;
PlanningandBudgeting;AccountingConsiderations;AnalysisandManagementReports;andRevisionsandData
Maintenance)whicharefurtherbrokendowninto32guidelines.EVMguidelineshaveaspecificfocuswithinthe
fiveareasonperformancemeasurement,whiletheLeanEnablerstakeabroaderviewofprogrammanagement.
Generally,all1.xand6.xLeanEnablerssupportEVM(LeanEnablerstoTreatPeopleasYourMostImportant
Asset(LeanPrinciple6)andLeanEnablerstoPursueProgramPerfection(LeanPrinciple5)respectively),as
theyareaimedatcreatingafundamentallyproductiveorganizationalculture.TheremainingLeanEnablersare
mappedtotheEVMfocusareasinTable10,whereapplicable.
Generally,manyofthetenetsoutlinedintheLeanEnablerswouldimprovetheeffectivenessand/orefficiency
withinanEVMimplementation.KeytoEVM,asexample,isthedisciplinerequiredinbreakingdownaprojects
work,thusclarifyingtherequirements.TheguidelinesinEVMcanbeenhancedbytheLeanEnablersto
MaximizeProgramValue(LeanPrinciple1).Similar,LeanEnablerstoCreateProgramFlow(LeanPrinciple3)hit
keyEVMdisciplines,suchasclearresponsibility,accountabilityandauthority,andintegrateallprogram
elementsandfunctionsthroughProgramGovernance.Finally,LeanEnablerstoPursueProgramPerfection(Lean
Principle5)matchesupwiththeEVMguideline,whichpromoteachangemanagementprocessandanalysisand
reportinginwhichlessonsarelearnedandshouldbeproactivelyappliedtoeffectprogramoutcomes.Lean
EnablersandEVMguidelinesbothsupporttheefforttoexecuteengineeringprogramswithexcellence,whichis
whysomanyofthesetenetsaresupportiveofeachother.
Table10:RelationshipofEVMandLeanEnablers
PMI Practice
Standard for Earned
Value Management
NDIA EVM Application Guide
Supported by
Lean Enabler
Organization
1. Definetheauthorizedworkelementsfortheprogram.Aworkbreakdown
structure(WBS),tailoredforeffectiveinternalmanagementcontrol,is
commonlyusedinthisprocess.
2. Identifytheprogramorganizationalstructureincludingthemajorsubcontractors
responsibleforaccomplishingtheauthorizedwork,anddefinethe
organizationalelementsinwhichworkwillbeplannedandcontrolled
3. Providefortheintegrationofthecompany'splanning,scheduling,budgeting,
workauthorizationandcostaccumulationprocesseswitheachother,andas
appropriate,theprogramworkbreakdownstructureandtheprogram
organizationalstructure.
4. Identifythecompanyorganizationorfunctionresponsibleforcontrolling
overhead(indirectcosts).
5. Provideforintegrationoftheprogramworkbreakdownstructureandthe
programorganizationalstructureinamannerthatpermitscostandschedule
performancemeasurementbyelementsofeitherorbothstructuresasneeded.
Planning,scheduling,andbudgeting
6. Scheduletheauthorizedworkinamannerthatdescribesthesequenceofwork
x Schedulework
andidentifiessignificanttaskinterdependenciesrequiredtomeetthe
x Establishbudget
requirementsoftheprogram.
x Determine
7. Identifyphysicalproducts,milestones,technicalperformancegoals,orother
measurement
indicatorsthatwillbeusedtomeasureprogress
methods
8. Establishandmaintainatimephasedbudgetbaseline,atthecontrolaccount
x Establish
level,againstwhichprogramperformancecanbemeasured.Budgetforlong
performance
termeffortsmaybeheldinhigherlevelaccountsuntilanappropriatetimefor
measurement
allocationatthecontrolaccountlevel.Initialbudgetsestablishedfor
baseline
performancemeasurementwillbebasedoneitherinternalmanagementgoals
ortheexternalcustomernegotiatedtargetcostincludingestimatesfor
authorizedbutundefinitizedwork.Ongovernmentcontracts,ifanovertarget
baselineisusedforperformancemeasurementreportingpurposes,prior
x Organizeproject
x Assign
responsibility
General:
1.x
6.x

Specific:
2.x
3.x
4.x
General:
1.x
6.x

Specific:
3.x
4.x
5.x
105
PMI Practice
Standard for Earned
Value Management
notificationmustbeprovidedtothecustomer.
9. Establishbudgetsforauthorizedworkwithidentificationofsignificantcost
elements(labor,material,etc.)asneededforinternalmanagementandfor
controlofsubcontractors.
10. Totheextentitispracticaltoidentifytheauthorizedworkindiscretework
packages,establishbudgetsforthisworkintermsofdollars,hours,orother
measurableunits.Wheretheentirecontrolaccountisnotsubdividedintowork
packages,identifythefartermeffortinlargerplanningpackagesforbudgetand
schedulingpurposes.
11. Providethatthesumofallworkpackagebudgetsplusplanningpackagebudgets
withinacontrolaccountequalsthecontrolaccountbudget.
12. Identifyandcontrolthelevelofeffortactivitybytimephasedbudgets
establishedforthispurpose.Onlythateffortwhichisunmeasurableorwhich
measurementisimpracticalmaybeclassifiedaslevelofeffort.
13. Establishoverheadbudgetsforeachsignificantorganizationalcomponentofthe
companyforexpensesthatwillbecomeindirectcosts.Reflectintheprogram
budgets,attheappropriatelevel,theamountsinoverheadpoolsthatare
plannedtobeallocatedtotheprogramasindirectcosts.
14. Identifymanagementreservesandundistributedbudget.
15. Providethattheprogramtargetcostgoalisreconciledwiththesumofall
internalprogrambudgetsandmanagementreserves.
Accountingconsiderations
16. Recorddirectcostsinamannerconsistentwiththebudgetsinaformalsystem
x Determine
controlledbythegeneralbooksofaccount.
measurement
17.
Whenaworkbreakdownstructureisused,summarizedirectcostsfromcontrol
methods
accountsintheworkbreakdownstructurewithoutallocationofasinglecontrol
accounttotwoormoreworkbreakdownstructureelements.
18. Summarizedirectcostsfromthecontrolaccountsintothecontractor's
organizationalelementswithoutallocationofasinglecontrolaccounttotwoor
moreorganizationalelements.
19. Recordallindirectcoststhatwillbeallocatedtothecontract.
20. Identifyunitcosts,equivalentunitcosts,orlotcostswhenneeded.
21. ForEVMS,thematerialaccountingsystemwillprovidefor:(1)accuratecost
accumulationandassignmentofcoststocontrolaccountsinamanner
consistentwiththebudgetsusingrecognized,acceptable,costingtechniques;
(2)costperformancemeasurementatthepointintimemostsuitableforthe
categoryofmaterialinvolved,butnotearlierthanthetimeofprogress
paymentsoractualreceiptofmaterial;(3)fullaccountabilityofallmaterial
purchasedfortheprogramincludingtheresidualinventory
Analysisandmanagementreports
22. Atleastonamonthlybasis,generatethefollowinginformationatthecontrol
x Analyzeproject
accountandotherlevelsasnecessaryformanagementcontrolusingactualcost
performance
datafrom,orreconcilablewith,theaccountingsystem:(1)Comparisonofthe
amountofplannedbudgetandtheamountofbudgetearnedforwork
accomplished.Thiscomparisonprovidestheschedulevariance.(2)Comparison
oftheamountofthebudgetearnedtheactual(appliedwhereappropriate)
directcostsforthesamework.Thiscomparisonprovidesthecostvariance.
23. Identify,atleastmonthly,thesignificantdifferencesbetweenbothplannedand
actualscheduleperformanceandplannedandactualcostperformance,and
providethereasonsforthevariancesinthedetailneededbyprogram
management.
24. Identifybudgetedandapplied(oractual)indirectcostsattheleveland
frequencyneededbymanagementforeffectivecontrol,alongwiththereasons
foranysignificantvariances.
25. Summarizethedataelementsandassociatedvariancesthroughtheprogram
organizationand/orworkbreakdownstructuretosupportmanagementneeds
106
Supported by
Lean Enabler
General:
1.x
6.x

General:
1.x
6.x

Specific:
4.x
PMI Practice
Standard for Earned
Value Management
andanycustomerreportingspecifiedinthecontract.
26. Implementmanagerialactionstakenastheresultofearnedvalueinformation.
27. Developrevisedestimatesofcostatcompletionbasedonperformancetodate,
commitmentvaluesformaterial,andestimatesoffutureconditions.Compare
thisinformationwiththeperformancemeasurementbaselinetoidentify
variancesatcompletionimportanttocompanymanagementandanyapplicable
customerreportingrequirementsincludingstatementsoffundingrequirements.
Revisionsanddatamaintenance
28. Incorporateauthorizedchangesinatimelymanner,recordingtheeffectsofsuch
x Maintain
changesinbudgetsandschedules.Inthedirectedeffortpriortonegotiationofa
performance
change,basesuchrevisionsontheamountestimatedandbudgetedtothe
measurement
programorganizations.
baseline
29. Reconcilecurrentbudgetstopriorbudgetsintermsofchangestotheauthorized
workandinternalreplanninginthedetailneededbymanagementforeffective
control.
30. Controlretroactivechangestorecordspertainingtoworkperformedthatwould
changepreviouslyreportedamountsforactualcosts,earnedvalue,orbudgets.
Adjustmentsshouldbemadeonlyforcorrectionoferrors,routineaccounting
adjustments,effectsofcustomerormanagementdirectedchanges,orto
improvethebaselineintegrityandaccuracyofperformancemeasurementdata.
31. Preventrevisionstotheprogrambudgetexceptforauthorizedchanges.
32. Documentchangestotheperformancemeasurementbaseline.
Supported by
Lean Enabler
General:
1.x
6.x
107
7.
HowtoUsetheLeanEnablersinYourOrganizationSomeSuggestions
ThissectiondiscussesthreeapproachestoimplementtheLeanEnablersinyourorganization:duringprogram
formation,forstrategictransformations,andduringcontinuousimprovement(ortroubleshooting)ofexisting
programs.MuchofthesuccessofallLeandeploymenttrulyrestswiththequalityoftheLeadershipofthe
organization.Leadersoftheorganizationshoulddefinewhattheirapproachis,communicateitwithgreat
repetition,visiblyparticipatewiththeLeantransformationactivities,andproviderewardandencouragementto
thosewhoareadvancingtheorganizationsLeanjourney.Giventhislevelofleadershipsupport,allofthese
differingapproachesbecomecomplementaryandultimatelybegintoachieveaLeanculturethatiscontinuously
improvingitselfthroughtheimplementationofLeanintheunendingpursuitofperfection.Ingeneral,every
professionalengagedinengineeringprogramsshouldreadthisguide.Theadditionalknowledgewillenhance
theircareer,increasetheirperformance,andmakethemabetterLeanThinker.
7.1
UsetheLeanEnablerswhenStartingaNewProgram
TheLeanEnablerscanmakeasignificantcontributionrightfromtheprogramstartwhentheyareconsideredin
theformativestages.Oneofthehabitsofhighlyeffectivepeopleistobeginwiththeendinmind.TheLean
Enablerssupportthisgoaltwofold,bystressingtheneedforaclearunderstandingofthecustomerstakeholder
requirementsandvalueperception,aswellasproposingvariouseffectiveprogrammanagementpracticesto
efficientlyfulfilltheserequirements.LeanthinkingcanbeingrainedinitsDNAatthefoundationlevelacrossall
ofthepeoplefromthetimetheybeginasteammembers.Thebenefitsofthisarethatthepeoplewithinthe
organizationevolvetothinkinLeantermsandpursueLeanasameansbywhichthecompanydeliversvalueto
itscustomers.Inprogramsandcompaniesofthisnature,Leansimplybecomesthemannerinwhichan
organizationdoesitswork,andLeanEnablersbecomemoreofanautomaticresponsebythepeopledoingwork
fortheircustomersonadailybasis.
7.2
GuidingStrategicProgramEnterpriseTransformation41
ThisguideandtheLeanEnablersareimportantrawmaterialforastrategicprogramenterprisetransformation
(seeFigure12).Itcanbeappliedtothebenefitoftheprograminallphasesofthetransformation.

41
Foradditionaldetail,see:Nightingale,D.andSrinivasan,J.(2011).BeyondtheLeanRevolution:AchievingSuccessfulandSustainable
EnterpriseTransformation.SaranacLake,NY:AMACOM.
108

Figure12:TheMITLAIEnterpriseTransformationRoadmap(Nightingale&Srinivasan2011)
7.2.1DuringtheStrategicCycle:
x
Determiningthestrategicimperatives:Areviewoftheprogrammanagementchallengesinthisguide
canbeusedtodevelopstrategicchangeimperatives,aswelluncovertheunderlyingcausesoftoplevel
strategicissues(e.g.,cost,qualityandscheduleproblems).
Engagingleadershipintransformation:TheLeanEnablershelptoputtogetheranenterpriselevel
transformationvisionwhenbuildingexecutivesupport.
7.2.2DuringthePlanningCycle:
x
x
x
Understandingthecurrentstate:Boththechallenges,aswellastheLeanEnablers,areideallysuitedto
analyzethecurrentstateoftheenterprise,forexamplebyassessingthecurrentlevelofperformanceor
alignmentwiththesuggestedEnablers.
Envisionanddesignthefutureenterprise:Again,theLeanEnablerscanbeuseddirectly,toidentify
thosethatthefutureenterpriseshouldalignwith,aswellasdefiningthedegreeofalignment.
Alignenterprisestructuresandbehaviors:TheLeanEnablerscontainasignificantnumberof
recommendationsregardingtheenterprisestructure,e.g.,stakeholderinteractions,rolesand
responsibilities,andsupplierintegration,whicharedirectlyapplicablehere.
109
Createtransformationplan:ThemappingoftheLeanEnablerstothechallengesandother
managementguidelines(e.g.,programmanagementperformancedomains,INCOSESystems
EngineeringHandbook)makesiteasytoidentifytheircontextandthusfacilitatesthecreationofan
overalltransformationplan.
7.2.3DuringtheExecutionCycle:
x
7.3
Implementandcoordinatethetransformationplan:Alleducationandtrainingmaterialthatwas
developedtocommunicatetheLeanEnablers(eitherpubliclyavailablethroughtheCommunityof
Practicethatdevelopedthisguide,orinternallyinaspecificorganization)canbeuseddirectlyto
supportthetransformationplan.
Nurturetransformationandembedenterprisethinking:AllpracticescapturedintheLeanEnablersin
thesectiononpursuingperfection(LeanPrinciple5)directlysupporttheknowledgecaptureand
continuousgrowthoftheenterprise.
ImprovingEngineeringProgramManagement
Theimpetusforimprovingexistingengineeringprogramscancomefromtwodirections:fixingaproblemor
strivingforexcellence.
Whenanorganizationidentifiessomeperformancegap,constraint,orproblemareaandthenneedstofinda
solutionsothatitcansucceed,theLeanEnablersareaverypowerfultooltodothat.Theyenablethe
organizationtoclearlyseetheissueandthenmovetheproblemtoanimprovedstate.The10program
managementchallengethemesdiscussedinSection4lendthemselvestoatopdownidentificationof
improvementpotential.AstheyaremappedtotheLeanEnablersinSection5andintheSectionA.5.1ofthe
Appendix,concretestartingpointsandnextstepscanberelativelyeasilydefined,basedontheLeanEnablers
thatcorrespondtothechallenges.
ThesecondandmoreproactivewayistoutilizeandimplementtheLeanEnablersiswhenanorganizationis
operatingwithoutanymajordifficulties,butdecidestofindevenbetterwaystoprovidegreatervaluetotheir
customers.Triggerscanbethestrategicplanningofthevaluestreamandthenchoosingtoproactivelyimprove
somekeyprocessesthatareoperatingwellenoughinthecurrentstate.Questions,suchaswhatareour
theoreticallimitsofperformance?orhowcanwesustainablyoutcompeteourcompetitors?orwhatdoes
truesuccessforourcustomerreallylooklike?areasked.Greatlevelsofsuccessareguaranteedwhenan
organizationattainsworldclassbusinessperformanceandsetsthestandardforeveryoneelse.
7.3.1ImplementationPlanning
Themostimportantaspectincommunication,training,andimplementationoftheLeanEnablersistheanswer
towhatistheproblemwearetryingtosolve?andwhatbusinessadvantagearewetryingtoachieve?The
organizationmustrecognizethatengineeringprogramshavecriticalchallengesandpitfalls,asidentifiedinthe
toptenchallenges.Asprogramexecutionsuffersandsolutionsaresought,usingtheLeanEnablersforprogram
managementbecomesrelevant.Leadingindicatorsthatincreasevisibilitytothechallengesandpitfallsinclude
poorprogramexecutionrelatedtocost,schedule,orquality;employeemoraleworkingonprograms;customer
requirementsthatarenotincorporatedintotheproduct;inexperiencedleadership;andtherealizationofthe
needtocontinuallyincreasecustomervalue.Facedwithchallenges,thisshouldprovidepullfromtheprogram
managementcommunitytosearchforhowtoavoidorresolvethechallenges.
Thisguideprovidesreferencematerial.Itisnotintendedtoserveasmandatorypractices,butratheritprovides
avettedlistofLeanEnablersthatcanhelpwithmanagingthechallengesofengineeringprograms.
110
7.3.2Selectingthemostrelevantenablers
TheintentofidentifyingtheprogrammanagementchallengesandassociatedLeanEnablersistoaidthe
organizationinmanagingengineeringprograms.Someoftheidentifiedchallengeswillbemorerelevantforyour
organization.Afteridentifyingwhichchallenges/enablerswillprovidethemostreturnontheinvestmentfocus
onthatsection.Agoodpracticeistoconductapilot.Selectaprogramandensurethattheleadershipofthat
programhasreadthroughthematerialsandhasconsciouslyselectedLeanEnablersthatwillhelpmanagetheir
engineeringprogram.Ensuregoodcommunicationandchangemanagementplansaredevelopedtofollowthe
implementationandresultsofusingtheseLeanEnablers.
7.3.3Customizingandtailoringtheenablers
Asthemostimportantchallengesorpitfallsareidentified,theLeanEnablersandtheirapplicationmustbe
tailoredfortheprogram.FurtherdefinitionoftheintentoftheLeanEnablersismustbeclearlyunderstoodby
thosewhowillusethisinformation.Mostimportantly,theprogramleadershipmustunderstandtheLean
PrinciplesValue,ValueStream,Flow,Pull,Perfection,andRespectforPeople.Thematurityofan
organizationsLeanunderstandingwillhelpdeterminethecustomizingandtailoringrequiredforspecific
programsandtheprogrammanagementleadership.
7.3.4Implementingtheenablersandmanagingorganizationalchange
TherearemanydifferentapproachestoimplementingtheEnablers.Considerprovidingashortoverviewofthe
materials,andassigningtheprogramleadershippilotorcommunitytoreadthroughthematerials.Thisinitial
exposureiscriticallyimportantatthispoint,theymayeithertakeakeeninterestandidentifycloselywithboth
thechallengesandtheEnablers,ortheymayignoreit,duetolackofknowledgeregardingLeananditsrolein
managingengineeringprograms.Theinitialexposuretothematerialsmustalsocomefromatrustedresource
someonewhois(orhasbeen)intheirrole,whorepresentstheinterestsofthiscommunity,isanearlyadopter
personality,andisaLeanadvocate.
Computerbasedtrainingandinstructorledcoursesprovideagoodwaytoincreasetheawarenessand
knowledgeofthisinformation.
Forboththatinitialoverviewandexposuretothematerials,considerasystematicchangemanagement
approach,suchastheADKARModel.42Thisprogramusesamodelof:
x
x
x
x
AAwareness:thisissatisfiedbytheinitialexposuretotheLeanEnablersforProgramManagement.
DDesire:thiscoversthereasonsofimportance,forexample,onalevelof1to5,thedesiretofurther
investigatethisinformation?
KKnowledge:thisreflectsmyunderstandingofLean,theLeanPrincipals,howtheyapplytomanaging
engineeringprograms,andwhatImustdotoincreasemyknowledgeofthisinformation.
AAbility:thiscoversmyabilitytodothework,obtainsufficienttrainingandenoughreference
materialsandothersupportinformationImayneedortrainingIshouldtake,andwhoelseshouldbe
involvedsotheytoowillbecapable.
RReinforcement:includeswhenresultswillbeavailable,howtorewardcorrectbehavior,andhowto
moveaprogrammanagementcommunitytoawareness/desire/knowledge/abilityofimplementingLean
Enablersandsubsequentlysustainthegains?
42
Foradditionaldetail,see:Hiatt,J.(2006).:ADKAR:AModelforChangeinBusiness,GovernmentandourCommunity.Loveland,CO:
ProsciResearch.
111
7.3.5DevelopingTrainingandCommunicationMaterial
TrainingandcommunicationmaterialswillbedevelopedseparatelyfromthisguideandthemappingoftheLean
Enablerstoprogrammanagement.Differenttypesoftrainingandcommunicationmaterialsshouldbe
consideredanddeveloped.Forinitialcommunications,executiveleadershipsupportencouragingawarenessof
thismaterialwouldbehelpful.Ifabodyofknowledgeexistsinthecompany/enterprise,thematerialsshouldbe
referencedwithkeysearchwordsforprogrammanagementpractitioners.Ifformalinstructorledprogram
managementtrainingisoffered,thisinformationshouldbeincorporatedevenatahighlevel,sotheprogram
managementcommunitywillknowofitsexistence.InformationonjoiningthisCommunityofPracticeshould
alsobeincluded.
112
8.
PotentialBarrierstoImplementingtheLeanEnablers
AnumberofbarrierscurrentlyexistthatmakeitmoredifficulttoimplementtheLeanEnablers.Thegeneral
resistancetochangebarrierthatallimprovementinitiativesface(andhowtoovercomeit)wasdiscussedbriefly
intheprevioussection.Inthissection,someconcreteadditionalbarriersareidentified,whichthesubject
matterexpertsencounteredwhendeveloping,discussingandvalidatingtheenablersinthreeareas:
governmentsponsoredprograms,commercialprograms,andacademiceducation
8.1
x
8.2
x
PotentialBarriersinGovernmentSponsoredPrograms
Unstablefundingenvironment.Discontinuitiesanduncertaintiesinthefundingofaprogramtendto
causeinstabilitieswithprogramstaffingandsubcontracts,andthusmakeefficientandeffective
programmanagementmoredifficult.
Lackofrigorinexercisingotherknownbestpractices.Publishedgovernmentacquisitionandprogram
managementguidelinesandpoliciescontainalargenumberofbestpracticesthatsupporttheLean
Enablers.However,theyarenotalwaysfullyimplemented,afactthatisregularlyidentifiedinformal
programauditsandevaluations.
Policiesdemandingearlysubcontracting.Somegovernmentprogramshaveapolicydrivendemandto
subcontractmanyprogrammanagementactivities,evenintheveryearlyphases.Thesepoliciesrisk
subcontractingofcriticalcoordinationandintegrationfunctions,creatingsignificantimpedimentstoan
effectiveprogramplanningandexecution.
Geographicallydispersedsubcontractingstrategy(e.g.madein50states).Politicalforcescreate
incentivesforcontractorsofgovernmentsponsoredprogramstosubdivideprogramactivitiesamongas
manystates,provinces,orotherjurisdictionsaspossible.Thiscouldcontradictthoseenablersthat
demandefficientorganizationalstructuresintheprogramenterprise.
Mismatchbetweencontractingvehicleandriskprofile.Thespectrumfromfixedpricetocostplus
contractscreatesspecificincentivesforbehavioronthegovernmentandthecontractorsides.Most
importantly,itassignstheresponsibilitiesforcarryingcostrisksdrivenforexamplebytechnology
uncertaintyorproductioninefficienciesbetweentheparties.Iftheriskprofileofaprogramisnot
alignedwiththecontractingvehicleandtheincentivesitcreates,theresultingprogramenvironment
willnotbeconducivetoimplementingtheLeanEnablersorcontrollingcost.
Programleadershiprotation.Thepersonneldevelopmentpolicy,especiallyinthemilitaryservices,
mightcallforaregularrotationofthegovernmentsideprogrammanager.Thisiscontrarytoanumber
ofLeanEnablersthatdemandclearandstableresponsibility,accountability,andauthorityonboththe
customerandcontractorsides.ItalsocontradictstheEnablersdemandingdeepprogramspecific
businessandsystemsengineeringknowledgeforthetopprogramleadership.
Promotingabureaucracyofartifactsratherthanengineeringgreatsystems.Riskaversionandthe
demandforoversightcancreateacultureandenvironmentthatkeepsengineersandotherexperts
busywithdocumentationandadministrativetasks,ratherthandoingwhattheyaregoodat.Thisis
opposedtotheLeanThinkingphilosophythatfocusesonvaluecreatingactivitiesandminimizes
(necessaryandunnecessary)waste,aswellascreatinganenvironmentthatrespectsspecialistsand
theirabilities.
PotentialBarriersinCommercial(andGovernmentSponsored)Programs
Notimetoimproveprogramperformance.Manyprogramsoperateunderserioustimeconstraintsand
pressure.Programmanagersprioritizeactivitiesbasedontheirurgency,notimportance.Ifthereisno
structuredprocesstocontinuouslyimproveprogramperformance,itmightbedifficulttofindthetime
tosavetimeandmoney.
113
8.3
x
114
Mismatchbetweenprogramexecutionandorganizationaldevelopmentofcapabilities.Programsare
focusedondeliveringbenefitsatacertaindateandnotdevelopingthelongtermcapabilitiesofthe
company.Ifthereisnobalancebetweeninvestingincapabilitydevelopmentandprogramexecution,
theperformanceoffutureprogramswillsuffer,andtheinterestinimplementingtheLeanEnablerswill
bediminished.
WehavetriedLean,itdoesnotworkhereattitude.Unfortunately,asignificantnumberof
companiesandemployeeshavebeenexposedtoaLeanmanagementapproachwhereLeaningout
wasequivalenttofiringpeople.Othersmayhavebeenpartofunsuccessfulattemptstoimplement
Leaninanorganizationwhereimprovementinitiativesandtheirassociatedbuzzwordschasedone
anotherdownthecorridors.ItisourstrongopinionthattheLeanprinciplespresentedinthisguideare
verypowerfultoolsforimprovingallprograms.Similarly,theLeanEnablersareexcellentstartingpoints
forprogramspecificimprovementinitiatives.IfyoudonotlikeLean,dropthetermandusetheLean
Enablersanyway.
Insufficientlevelofcompetition.TheLeanThinkingphilosophyinherentlydemandsacompetitive
environmentwherecompaniesandemployeesstriveforcontinuousimprovement.
PotentialBarriersinAcademiaandEducation
Stovepipededucationandresearch.Thefieldsofknowledgegoverningcomplexprograms,suchas
LeanThinking,ProjectManagement,SystemsThinking,andSystemsEngineeringareinherently
multidisciplinarydomains.Yet,manyuniversitiesandeducationalprogramssufferfromthetraditional
stovepipedorganizationsintodomaindepartments.Thisresultsinstrongbiastowardsspecialist
knowledge,onlypromotingandfundingresearchandteachingondepthratherthanbreadth.Both
approachesmustgohandinhand,andbesupportedasequallyimportant.
Insufficientemphasisonglobalchallengesandsolutions.Mostmoderncomplexengineeringprograms
areincreasinglyglobalinscopeinvolvingglobalsupplychain,globalworkforce,globaleconomics,and
globalculture.Yet,manyeducationalprogramsinuniversitiesdonotexposestudentsenoughtothese
globalchallengesandtheirsolutions.
LackofLeanThinkingincurricula.Althoughwellestablishedatmanyuniversities,therearenotenough
managementandengineeringcoursesthatteachLeanthinkinginasufficientmanner.Additional
courseswouldenableabroaderpercentageofemployeestodrivepositiveandlastingchangesthrough
theapplicationofLeanThinkingtechniques.
APPENDIX
A.1
ComplementaryInformationSources
Thefollowingsectionslistadditionalbooksandstudiesthatarerelevanttomanaginglargescaleengineering
programs.Asthefieldisvast,thelistisnotcomplete.However,wefoundthesebooksandpublicationstobe
insightfulandhelpfulinourwork.
A.1.1 LeanThinking,LeanProductDevelopmentandLeanSystemsEngineering
Oppenheim,B.W.(2011).Leanforsystemsengineeringwithleanenablersforsystemsengineering.Hoboken,
NJ:Wiley.
TheINCOSELeanSystemsEngineeringWorkingGroupfirstpublishedtheLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering
undertheleadershipofBohdanOppenheimandDeborahSecorin2009.Thisbookcontainsdetailed
explanationsofeachofthe147enablers,withexamples,valuepromotedandwastepreventedimplementation
suggestions,laggingfactors,andreadinglists.ThesehavebeenintegratedintoLeanEnablersformanaging
engineeringprograms,whicharepresentedinthisguide,however,thebookoffersamuchmoredetailed
discussionoftheoriginalLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering.
Reinertsen,D.G.(2009).TheprinciplesofproductdevelopmentflowSecondGenerationLeanProduct
Development.OverlandPark,KS:Celeritas.
Thisbookemphasizestheideaofflow(LeanPrinciple3,seeSection2.4.3)andpresentsboththeoryand
practicaladviceonhowtoimplementitinproductdevelopmentandengineeringorganizations.Itcontainsa
reviewofeconomicfundamentalsofproductdevelopment,givesanoverviewofqueuingtheoryandits
applicationinmanagingengineeringprograms,thereductionofvariabilityanduncertaintyindecisionmaking,
themanagementofbatchsizesofengineeringworkandtheassociatedworkinprogress,decentralized
controlofengineering,controlunderuncertainty,andtheuseoffastfeedbacktomaximizevalue.
Murman,E.,Allen,T.,&CutcherGershenfeld.(2002).Leanenterprisevalue:InsightsfromMITsLean
aerospaceinitiative.Basingstoke,U.K.:PalgraveMacmillan.
Thekeyinsightsandfindingsofthe9yearLeanAerospaceInitiative(LAI)studyatMITformthebasisforthe
principlesandthevaluecreationframeworkdevelopedandexploredinthisbook.Itemphasizesthekey
challengeofleanattheenterpriselevelasbalancingmultistakeholdervaluecreationwithcontinuously
eliminatingwaste.Itcontraststraditionalleanapproachesfocusedontoolsandlocalizedimprovements
(characterizedbyislandsofsuccess)withanenterprisesystemapproachtodefiningLeanandLean
improvements.Avaluecreationframeworkisdefinedwithanillustratedapplicationoftheframeworkatthe
program,corporate,andnationalvaluestreamlevelsofanalysis.Winnerofthe2003IAAEngineeringSciences
BookAward.
Womack,J.&Jones,D.(2003).Leanthinking:Banishwasteandcreatewealthinyourcorporation(2nded.).
NewYork:FreePress.
ThisclassicbookoutlinesaleanframeworkandvaluebasedbusinesssystembasedontheToyotamodel.It
includescasestudiesfromtheautomotive,aerospace,andothermanufacturingindustries.Theleanframework
startswithbusinessesdefiningthe"value"thattheyproduceinproductsthatbestaddresscustomerneeds.
Businessleadersthenidentifyandclarifythe"valuestream"fortheproduct."Flow"alignstheproductsvalue
streamacrossorganizationalboundaries."Pull"activatestheflowtowardsthepullofthecustomer'sneeds.The
businessthenstrivesthereaftertowardsachieving"perfection"throughcontinuousimprovement.Themodelis
115
orientedtowardchangefromanonleantoaleanstate,andtheexamplescomeprimarilyfrommanufacturing
organizations.
Morgan,J.,&Liker,J.(2006).TheToyotaproductdevelopmentsystem:Integratingpeople,processand
technology.NewYork:ProductivityPress.
ThisbookthoroughlyexaminesandanalyzestheproductdevelopmentapproachofToyota.Itcharacterizesthe
ToyotaProductDevelopmentSystem(TPDS)through13leanproductdevelopmentprinciplesorganizedaround
process,people,andITtoolsandtechnologysubsystems.Itcomparesandcontraststheproductdevelopment
processofToyotawiththatofaU.S.competitor.ExamplesfromToyotaandtheU.S.competitordemonstrate
valuestreammappingasanextraordinarilypowerfultoolforcontinuousimprovement.Thisbookoffersoneof
themostcompletedescriptionsoftheTPDS.ItislargelydescriptiveoftheTPDS,anddoesnotattemptto
provideextensiveimplementationsuggestions.Itisthewinnerofthe2007ShingoPrizeforExcellencein
ManufacturingResearch.
Ward,A.(2007).Leanproductandprocessdevelopment.Cambridge,MA:LeanEnterpriseInstitute.
Theauthorofthisbookisoneofthepioneersinthestudyandpracticeofleanproductdevelopment.Thisbook
addressesfundamentalsofproductdevelopmentandidentifiesthesourcesofthemostcommonproblems(e.g.,
wastes)thatplaguemanyproductdevelopmentorganizations.Keypracticesofleanproductdevelopersare
describedandcomparedwithconventionalproductdevelopmentpractice.Principlesofeffectiveteamwork,
engineeringfundamentals,designmethodology,andtheoriesaboutmanagement,cognition,andlearningare
broughttogethertodescribethebasicconceptsofleanproductdevelopment.Implicationsofthetheoriesare
illustratedinrecommendationsforimplementation,althoughthisstopsshortofbeingaworkbookonthe
design,implementation,andoperationofaleanproductorganization.
Oehmen,J.,&Rebentisch,E.(2010).Wasteinleanproductdevelopment,MITLAIWhitepaperSeries.
Cambridge,MA:MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology.
ThiswhitepapersummarizestheMITLAIresearchthatappliestoprogrammanagement.Thecontextofmostof
theresearchdiscussedinthiswhitepaperarepertinenttolargescaleengineeringprograms,particularlyinthe
aerospaceanddefensesector.TheMITLAIWhitepaperSeriesmakesalargenumberofMITLAIpublications
around120accessibletoindustrypractitionersbygroupingbymajorprogrammanagementactivities.Thegoal
istoprovidestartingpointsforprogrammanagers,programmanagementstaff,andsystemengineersto
exploretheknowledgeaccumulatedbyMITLAIanddiscovernewthoughtsandpracticalguidancefortheir
everydaychallenges.Thiswhitepaperbeginsbyintroducingthechallengesofprograms,definingprogram
management,andthengivinganoverviewofexistingprogrammanagementframeworks.Anewprogram
managementframeworkisintroducedthatistailoredtowardsdescribingtheearlyprogrammanagement
phasesuptothestartofproduction.ThisframeworkisusedtosummarizetherelevantMITLAIresearch.
Availableat:http://lean.mit.edu/products/leanenterpriseproductdevelopmentforpractitioners
A.1.2 SystemsEngineering
INCOSE.(October2011).TheINCOSESystemsEngineeringHandbook(ver3.2.2).SanDiego,CA:author.
Thishandbookprovidesadescriptionofthekeyprocessactivitiesperformedbysystemsengineers.Itdescribes
whateachsystemsengineeringprocessactivityentails,inthecontextofdesigningforaffordabilityand
performance.Thisdocumentisnotintendedtoadvocateanylevelofformalityasnecessaryorappropriateinall
situations.Someprojectsmaychoosewhichofspecificactivitiesaretobeperformed,whileotherprojectsmay
adheretotheconceptsformally,withinterimproductsunderformalconfigurationcontrol.Itisdevelopedfor
116
thenewsystemsengineerortheexperiencedsystemsengineerwhoneedsaconvenientreference.The
handbookisconsistentwiththeISO/IEC15288:2008standard.
Availableathttp://www.incose.org/ProductsPubs/products/sehandbook.aspx
NASA.(2001).NASAsystemsengineeringhandbook,NASA/SP20076105,Rev1.Washington,DC:author.
Thishandbookprovidestoplevelguidelinesforgoodsystemsengineeringpracticesbasedonthecollective
experienceofNASAfromthedevelopmentofaerospacesystems.Thehandbookconsistsofsixcorechapters:
(1)systemsengineeringfundamentalsdiscussion,(2)theNASAprogram/projectlifecycles,(3)systems
engineeringprocessestoproceedfromconcepttodesign,(4)systemsengineeringprocessestoproceedfrom
designtoafinalproduct,(5)crosscuttingmanagementprocessesinsystemsengineering,and(6)specialtopics
relativetosystemsengineering.Thesecorechaptersaresupplementedbyappendicesthatprovideoutlines,
examples,andfurtherinformationtoillustratetopicsinthecorechapters.Thehandbookmakesextensiveuse
ofboxesandfigurestodefine,refine,illustrate,andextendconceptsinthecorechapters.
Availableathttp://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20080008301_2008008500.pdf
OfficeoftheDeputyUnderSecretaryofDefenseforAcquisitionandTechnology.(2008).Systemsengineering
guideforsystemsofsystems,Version1.0.Washington,DC:author.
Thisguideextendsthemethodsofsystemsengineeringtotheengineeringofsystemsofsystems.Itdiscusses
thesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweensystemsandsystemsofsystems,thesystemsengineeringprocessto
developsystemsofsystems,andthelifecyclephasesofsystemsofsystems.
Availableat:http://www.acq.osd.mil/se/docs/SEGuideforSoS.pdf
Rebovich,G.Jr.,&DeRosa,J.K.(2011).PatternsofsuccessinsystemsengineeringAcquisitionofIT
intensivegovernmentsystems.MITRETechnicalPaper,McLean,VA:TheMITRECorporation.
ThisreportidentifiessuccesspatternsinthesystemsengineeringoflargeITacquisitionprograms.Itisbasedon
anindepthanalysisof12highlysuccessfulprograms.Twolargescalesuccesspatternsemergedandare
describedindetail,eachwithseveralrecurringsubpatterns."BalancingtheSupplyWeb"addressessocial
interdependenciesamongenterprisestakeholderswhohavedifferentequitiesinthedevelopmentofthe
capability."HarnessingTechnicalComplexity"addressesthetechnicalinterdependenciesamongsystem
componentsthattogetherdeliveranoperationalcapabilityfortheenterprise.
Availableathttp://mitre.org/work/tech_papers/2011/11_4659/
deWeck,O.,Roos,D.,&Magee,C.(2011).EngineeringsystemsMeetinghumanneedsinacomplex
technologicalworld.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.
Today'slargescale,highlycomplexsociotechnicalsystemsconverge,interact,anddependoneachotherinways
engineersofthepastcouldbarelyhaveimagined.Asscale,scope,andcomplexityincrease,engineersconsider
technicalandsocialissuestogetherinahighlyintegratedwayastheydesignflexible,adaptable,robustsystems
thatcanbeeasilymodifiedandreconfiguredtosatisfychangingrequirementsandnewtechnological
opportunities.Thebookoffersacomprehensiveexaminationofsuchsystems.Throughscholarlydiscussion,
concreteexamples,andhistory,theauthorsconsidertheengineer'schangingrole,newwaystomodeland
analyzethesesystems,theimpactsonengineeringeducation,andthefuturechallengesofmeetinghuman
needsthroughexistingtechnologicallyenabledsystems.
117
Rebovich,G.,&White,B.(2010).Enterprisesystemsengineering:Advancesinthetheoryandpractice.Boca
Raton,FL:CRCPress.
Seldomdoisolatedsystemsengineeringgroupsworkonlocalproblemstobuildstovepipesolutions;systems
seldomaredevelopedinasocial,political,economic,ortechnicalvacuum.Yet,concertedattemptstobetter
implementsystemsengineeringhavenotimprovedthesituation.Thisbookinvestigatestheevolutionof
systemsengineering,includingbothsocialchangeandtechnologicalchange.Coveragerangesfromthecomplex
characteristicsandbehaviorsofenterprisestothechallengestheyposeforengineeringandtechnology.The
bookexaminestheemergingdisciplineofenterprisesystemsengineeringandtheimpactsofenterprise
processesandleadingedgetechnologiesontheevolutionofanenterprise.
A.1.3 ProgramManagement
ProjectManagementInstitute(2012).TheStandardforProgramManagementThirdedition(exposuredraft
version).NewtownSquare,PA:author.43
TheStandardforProgramManagementidentifiespracticesformanagingmultipleprojectsandprograms
successfullyanddescribeskeyunderlyingconceptssuchasthefiveProgramManagementPerformance
DomainsandtheProgramManagementSupportingProcessesthatarefundamentaltothedeliveryofsuccessful
programs.Section1providesaProjectManagementFrameworkasabasisforunderstandingprogram
management.Section2definesprogrammanagementanditscomponentpartsanddiscussesprogram
managementinthecontextoftheorganization.TheremainingsectionsdescribetheProgramManagement
PerformanceDomainsindetail,explainhowtheprogrammanagerworkswithinthesedomainsduringthelifeof
aprogram,andexplainsthefoundationalconceptsofbenefitsmanagementandbenefitssustainment.Focuson
theseconceptshelpstoensurethatprogrammanagersleadprogramsinamannerthatfacilitatesimproved
performanceandachievementofbenefitsthatarederivedfromtheprogram.
UKCabinetOffice.(2011)Managingsuccessfulprogrammes.London,England,UK:author.
ManagingSuccessfulProgrammescomprisesasetofprinciplesandprocessesforusewhenmanaginga
program.Itisnotprescriptive,butisflexibleanddesignedtobeadaptedtomeettheneedsoflocal
circumstances.TheManagingSuccessfulProgrammes(MSP)frameworkwasbuiltupontheexperiences
numerousprograms.MSPdefinestherolesandresponsibilitiesofallwhoneedtoformpartoftheleadershipof
aprogram.Effectiveleadershipofaprogramisachievedthroughinformeddecisionmakingandflexible
management.TheMSPframeworkisbasedonthreecoreconcepts:MSPPrinciples,whicharederivedfrom
positiveandnegativelessonslearnedfromprogramexperiences;MSPGovernanceThemesthatdefinean
organization'sapproachtoprogrammanagement;andMSPTransformationalFlow,whichprovidesaroute
throughthelifecycleofaprogramfromitsconceptionthroughtothedeliveryofnewcapabilities,outcomes,
benefitsrealization,andbusinesstransformation.
Partington,D.,Pellegrinelli,S.,&Young,M.(2005).Attributesandlevelsofprogrammemanagement
competence:Aninterpretivestudy.InternationalJournalofProjectManagement,23(2),8795.
Abstract:Growthintheuseofprogramsasavehicleforimplementingstrategyhasbeenaccompaniedbya
needtounderstandthecompetenceofeffectiveprogrammanagers.Corporateleadersknowthatpromoting

43
PMIreleasedareviewversionofthethirdeditionofTheStandardforProgramManagementinFebruary2012,reflectingproposed
changestothestandardforpublicreviewandcomment.ThefinalcontentofTheStandardforProgramManagementThirdEdition,
scheduledforpublicationinJanuary2013,mayvaryfromtheexposuredraftversionoftherevisedstandarddiscussedhereandusedin
thisdocument.
118
provenprojectmanagersintoprogrammanagerrolesisunreliable,yetlittlerigorousresearchhasbeendone
intothedistinctivenessofprogrammanagementcompetence.Usingtheinterpretiveapproachknownas
phenomenography,westudiedthemanagementof15strategicprogramsspreadoversevenindustrysectors.
Wepresentourfindingsintheformofaframeworkof17keyattributesofprogrammanagementwork,each
conceivedatfourlevelsinahierarchyofcompetence.
Pellegrinelli,S.(2011).Whatsinaname:Projectorprogramme?InternationalJournalofProject
Management,v29(2),232240.
Abstract:Thecommonconceptionofprogrammanagementasanextensionorvariantofprojectmanagement,
andthereforeendowedwiththesamerationalist,instrumentalunderpinnings,isreviewedandquestioned.In
particular,theimplicationsoflabelingarehighlighted,andthelimitationsforpracticeofconflatedorpoorly
differentiatedconceptionsormodelsofprojectmanagementandprogrammanagementarediscussed.The
centralargumentofthispaperisthatadistinctprogrammanagementmodel,groundedinaviewofsocial
realityascontinuallyconstructedthroughtheactionsandinteractionsofindividualsabecomingorrelated
socialconstructionistontologyprovidesanalternativewayofshapingandundertakingchangeinitiatives.Such
aprogrammanagementmodel,whenpracticedbyreflective,contextsensitive,andvalue/ethicallyaware
practitioners,cancoexistwithandcomplementtraditionalprojectmanagementapproacheswithinan
organization.
Thiry,M.(2010).Programmanagement(Fundamentalsofprojectmanagement).Surrey,England,UK:Gower.
Thisbookisbasedonpracticalapplicationsofprogrammanagementindifferentcountries,aswellasleading
standards.Itgoesbeyondmultipleprojectmanagementtoconnectprogrammanagementwithbusiness
strategyandvaluerealization.Sectionscovertheprogramscontext,elements,actors,andlifecycle.It
emphasizestheneedforprogramspecificprocesses,basedonaniterativelifecycleandthemanagementof
multiplestakeholdersandtheirexpectedbenefits.Thebookisgroundedinatheoreticalframework,
complementedbyanumberofcasestudies.Itanalyzesorganizationalstructuresforprogrammanagementand
providestoolsandtechniquestodealwithcomplex,unplannedchangeinastructuredmanner."Program
Management"wasawardedthe2010CanadianProjectManagementBookAwardofMeritbytheProject
ManagementAssociationofCanada.
U.S.DepartmentofDefense.(2008).OperationoftheDefenseAcquisitionSystems(InstructionNumber
5000.02andrelateddocuments).Washington,DC:author.
ThisinstructionsetsthemanagementframeworkforlargescaleengineeringprogramsfundedbytheU.S.
DepartmentofDefense.Itisoneexampleoftheprogrammanagementpracticesemployedandprescribedby
governmentcustomers.Itcovers(amongotherelements)theprogramlifecyclewithitsstagegatesandgeneral
lifecyclephaserequirements;categoriesofprograms;ITaspects;testingandevaluationguidelines;guidelines
forcostestimation;programmanagementguidelines;andsystemsengineeringrequirements.TheDefense
AcquisitionUniversitydevelopedanumberofguidestooperationalizetheserequirements,forexamplethe
JointProgramManagementHandbook,aswellastheDefenseAcquisitionGuidebook.
x
x
x
DoDi5000.02:http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/500002p.pdf
DAUJointProgramManagementHandbook:
http://www.dau.mil/pubscats/PubsCats/Joint%20PM%20Handbook%2010_2004.pdf
DAUDefenseAcquisitionGuidebook:https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=350719
119
A.2
CompleteListofEngineeringProgramChallenges
Table11containsacompletelistofallprogrammanagementchallengesthatwereidentifiedbythesubject
matterexperts.Thechallengesthatreceivedahighpriorityintheassessmentsurveywereconsolidatedtothe
10majorengineeringprogramchallengesinSection4.Thefollowinglistfollowstheoriginalstructureinwhich
thechallengeswerecollected.
TableA1:CompleteListofIdentifiedEngineeringProgramChallenges
Challenge #
Engineering Program Challenge
1.
ProgramExecution
1.1.
Highlevelprogramissues
1.1.1.
Unstablefunding
1.1.2.
Overridinginfluenceoffundingrelatedconstraints
1.1.3.
Noactivitybasedcostingandmanagement
1.1.4.
Norealisticprogramschedule
1.1.5.
Resourcesfocusedonfixingproblemsinsteadofpreventingthem
1.1.6.
Insufficientprogrammanagementresourcesatcontractor
1.1.7.
Insufficientprogrammanagement/oversightresourcesatcustomer
1.2.
Programleadership
1.2.1.
Lackofleadershipcommitment
1.2.2.
Problematicallocationofresponsibilityanddecisionrights
1.2.3.
Insufficientprogrammanagerqualification
1.2.4.
Lackofalignmentandintegrationbetweenprogrammanagementandsystemsengineering
1.2.5.
Nocoherentleadershipteamthatrepresentsallimportantfunctions(e.g.,programmanagementandsystems
engineering)
1.2.6.
Programmanagementtaskbrokendownbetweentoomanyindividualsand/ororganizations
1.3.
Multiprojectcoordination
1.3.1.
Competingresourcerequirements(e.g.,allocationandchoiceofresources)
1.3.2.
Unstableprojectpriorities
1.3.3.
Problemswithmanagingstafflevelsduringprojectrampupandrampdown
1.3.4.
Troubledprojectsarenotcanceledearly
1.3.5.
Nobufferscheduledbetweenprojects
1.3.6.
Insufficientmanagementofsubprojects
1.4.
Baselineplanning,controlandadaptation
1.4.1.
Noclearplanningofcost/schedule/performancebaselines
1.4.2.
Unrealisticcost/schedule/performancebaselines
1.4.3.
Insufficientoversightofadherencetocost/schedule/performancebaselines(alsoseechallengesregardingmetrics)
1.4.4.
Insufficientadaptationofcost/schedule/performancebaselinestochangingprogramenvironment/assumptions
1.4.5.
Insufficientpropagationofchangestocost/schedule/performancebaselinesthroughtheprogram
1.5.
Configurationmanagement
1.5.1.
Insufficientconfigurationmanagementofkeyprograminformationassets
1.5.2.
Insufficienttransparencyregardingschedule,scope,cost,qualityandperformancestatus
1.5.3.
Insufficientcoordinationandcommunicationofoutofpositionwork
1.5.4.
Oversimplificationofconfigurationmanagementbyhighlevelplanning
1.5.5.
Workingonoutdateddatawastesresources
120
Challenge #
1.6.
ProgramControllingandmetricssystem
1.6.1.
Metricsarerearviewmirrororientedandarenotgoodindicatorsforfutureissues
1.6.2.
Metricsareoutdatedatthetimeofreporting
1.6.3.
Metricsdonotallowdrilldowntounderstandrootcausesofpoormetrics
1.6.4.
DiverseanddistributedITsystemsanddatarepositoriesdonotallowefficientacquisitionandaggregationofdata
formetrics
1.6.5.
Metricshaveshorttermfocus
1.6.6.
Metricsdonotconsiderhumanbehavior(gaming)
1.6.7.
Metricsaretoohighlevelandcannotbeusedforoperationaldecisionmaking
1.6.8.
Metricsaretoodetailedandcauseexcessiveworkloadtotrack
1.6.9.
Frequencyofmonitoringofmetricsisnotalignedwithtimelydecisionmakingprocess(toofrequentortoo
infrequent)
1.6.10.
Nometricstoreflectcrossfunctionalprocesses
1.6.11.
Nometricstotrackprojectperformanceorprojectprogress(e.g.,EVM)
1.7.
Programriskmanagement
1.7.1.
Nodefinedriskmanagementprocess
1.7.2.
Notenoughunderstandingofprogramrisks
1.7.3.
Noinvolvementofallstaffintoriskmanagement
1.7.4.
Disconnectbetweenriskmanagementandotherprogrammanagementprocesses
1.7.5.
Insufficientresourcesandfundingforriskmanagementactivities(identification,assessment,mitigation,monitoring)
1.7.6.
Insufficientfocusonquicklyresolvingidentifiedrisks
1.7.7.
Neglectofthehumanaspectofriskmanagement,thatis,cultureorincentivesthatpenalizetheflaggingofrisksor
reportingofbadnews
1.8.
HRDevelopment,staffing,expertise
1.8.1.
Skilllevelofindividuals(inprogrammanagement,theprogramteam,projectteamsand/orstaff)notsufficient
1.8.2.
Inadequateteamexperience
1.8.3.
Ineffectiveprocesstotransferknowledgefromexperiencedemployees/teammemberstonew(er)employees(in
particularinindustrieswithagingworkforce)
1.8.4.
Inadequateidentificationofindividualskilldevelopmentneeds
1.8.5.
Unsupportiveenvironmentforindividuallearning(e.g.,throughtrainingopportunitiesoralsomakingmistakes)
1.8.6.
Programneedsregardingintellectualcapitalareunclear
1.8.7.
Nospecialistcareerpath
1.8.8.
Insufficientresourceplanning(understaffingornoidentificationofpossibleunderstaffing)
1.8.9.
Rotationofkeypersonneloncontractorsideleadstoinstabilitiesinprogram
1.8.10.
Rotationofkeypersonneloncustomersideleadstoinstabilitiesinprogram
2.
EnterpriseStakeholderManagement
2.1.
ProgramStakeholderManagement
2.1.1.
Uncleardefinitionofstakeholders
2.1.2.
Unclearunderstandingofstakeholdervalueperception
2.1.3.
Unstructured/unplannedstakeholdercommunication
2.1.4.
Insufficientstakeholderintegration(inparticularcustomersandsuppliers)
2.1.5.
Insufficientmanagement/alignmentofdifferingprioritieswithincollaboratingorganizationsandwithstakeholders
2.1.6.
Noprocessto(re)integrateandmanageconstantlychangingstakeholdersorstakeholderrepresentatives
121
Challenge #
2.1.7.
Compliancerequirementsofdifferentstakeholdersareindependentofeachotherandnotintegrated(leadingto
increasedworkload,mismatchbetweenrequirements,preventsefficientfulfillmentofsimilarrequirements)
2.2.
Coordinationwithintheenterprise
2.2.1.
Differingunderstandingandunclearunderstandingofwhatprogramenterprisecomprises
2.2.2.
Lackofenterprisewidecoordinationofoptimization:onlylocalprocessandorganizationoptimization
2.2.3.
InsufficientmanagementofIPissues
2.2.4.
Insufficientcommunicationandinformationflowwithintheprogram(distance,timezones,cultures,etc.)
2.2.5.
Lackofprocessstandardization
2.2.6.
Unclearprioritiesbetweenimmediatebusinessgoals(e.g.,profitabilityofownprogram)andresponsibilityforother
programs(e.g.,capturinglessonslearned,drivingcontinuousimprovement)
2.3.
Taskallocationandresponsibilitywithintheenterprise
2.3.1.
Outsourcingoftaskswithoutretainingsufficientinhousecapabilitiestosupervise,appraise,andmanageoutsourced
tasks
2.3.2.
Creatingdependencebylosingcriticalcapabilitiesthroughoutsourcing
2.3.3.
Nofosteringandmaintainingofpersonalaccountabilityofplansandoutcomes
2.3.4.
Insufficientcoordinationandintegrationbetweenlineandstafffunctions
2.3.5.
Rolesandresponsibilitiesbetweenstaffandlinefunctionsnotdefined
2.3.6.
Valueofstafforganizationand/orneedsoflineorganizationunclear
2.3.7.
Nocleardefinitionofhandoffswithinandbetweenstaffandline
2.3.8.
Unclearteamleadership(whenisline,whenstafforganizationresponsibleforanissue?)
2.3.9.
Nosinglepointofaccountabilityformajorprogramobjectives(time,cost,performance)
2.4.
Changemanagement
2.4.1.
Insufficientuseofbenchmarkingandassessmenttoolsforevaluationofenterprisestructure
2.4.2.
Noenterprisewideintegratedcontinuousimprovementprocess
2.4.3.
Insufficientuseofbenchmarkingandassessmenttoolstoidentifyimprovementpotentials
2.4.4.
Noenterprisewideorganizationallearningandchangemanagementprocess
2.5.
Valuedelivery,benefitsrealizationandmanagement
2.5.1.
Noexplicit,favorablebusinesscaseforallstakeholders
2.5.2.
Uncoordinatedbusinesscasesfordifferentcompanies/stakeholders
2.5.3.
Unclear/notquantifiedvaluefromprogram
2.5.4.
Nometricstomeasurevalue/benefitsfordifferentstakeholders
2.5.5.
Programvaluetostakeholdersisnotdocumentedandtrackedcontinuously
2.5.6.
Valuerealizationisnotalignedwithchangemanagement
2.5.7.
Noclear,coordinatedprocessandstrategyforvaluerealization
2.5.8.
Nointegrated,lifecycleviewofprogramvalueandbenefits
2.5.9.
Programvaluenotsustainedandtransitionedoverspecificprogramphases(orsubprojects)
2.6.
Knowledgemanagement
2.6.1.
Noopeninformationsharing
2.6.2.
Nodocumentationoflessonslearned
2.6.3.
Insufficientornonstandardizedusageofinformationtechnology
2.6.4.
Noadequatesharingofcapturedlessonslearnedacrosstheenterprise
2.6.5.
Lackoffeedbackmechanismstoturnlessonslearnedintoaction;noimplementationoflessonslearnedasnewbest
practicesthroughouttheprogram
2.7.
Incentivealignment
122
Challenge #
2.7.1.
Lackofincentives
2.7.2.
Lackofincentivetransparency
2.7.3.
Mismatchofincentivewithdesiredoutcome
2.7.4.
Misalignedincentivesforcost/schedule/qualitypriorities
2.7.5.
Misalignedincentivesforcollaborationbetweenstaff,projectteam,suppliers,customers,orotherstakeholders
2.7.6.
Constraintsandincentivesprovidedbythecontractaremisalignedwithprogramtaskandriskprofile
3.
Scoping,PlanningandContracting
3.1.
Definitionofstakeholderneedsandrequirements
3.1.1.
Stakeholdersdonotclearlyarticulatetheirrequirements(e.g.,implicitrequirementsorunawareofrequirements)
3.1.2.
Incompleteunderstandingofstakeholderrequirements
3.1.3.
Erroneousunderstandingofstakeholderrequirements
3.1.4.
Lackofappreciationofrequirementscomplexity;derivedrequirementsarenotidentified
3.1.5.
Nolearningfrompreviousneeddefinitions
3.1.6.
Requirementsarenotformulatedproperly(e.g.,solutionneutral)
3.1.7.
Requestforproposal(RFP)isissuedbycustomertooearly,beforecustomerrequirementsreachedsufficientclarity
andstability
3.2.
Managingtradeoffs
3.2.1.
Insufficientmultiattributetradeoffs/tradespaceexploration
3.2.2.
Noeffective/quantitativetradeoffstudiesbetweencost,schedule,andperformance
3.3.
Lifecycleestimationofcost,schedule,performance
3.3.1.
Lackoflifecycledocumentation
3.3.2.
Insufficientprobabilisticestimates
3.3.3.
Toolittleupdatesonestimatedvalueduringearlyphases
3.3.4.
Estimatesdoesnotreflectallaspectsofthelifecycle
3.4.
Contractnegotiationandmanagement
3.4.1.
Contractfailstoestablishclearoperational,reallifeexpectationsregardingprogrammanagement(e.g.,
communication,financial,andlegalaspects)
3.4.2.
Disconnectbetweenoperationalprogrammanagementandcontractrequirements
3.4.3.
Impreciseorunclearcontracttermsandconditions
3.4.4.
Illdesignedcontractscope
3.4.5.
Unclearawardcriteriaandprocess
3.4.6.
Programmanagersdonotreadcontract;donotuseitasavaluableresource
3.4.7.
Contractsfailtokeepupwithdynamicdevelopmentofprogram
3.4.8.
Contractabusedascluborfencebydifferentparties
3.4.9.
Contractfailstoestablishwinwinsituation
3.4.10.
Contractregulationsarenotbasedonbestpracticesandcauseadditionalburden,ordonotencouragetheuseof
bestpractices(e.g.,contractingdesignedonpastbadexperiences,notstructuredtoprovideefficientprogram
managementenvironment)
3.4.11.
Contracthindersinformationflowwithintheprogram(e.g.,restrainingconfidentialityrequirements)
3.4.12.
Nostandardstructurefor(sub)contracts
3.4.13.
Typeofcontractdoesnotreflectoperationalrequirementsorbestpractices(e.g.,costpluscontractforprogram
withhighleveloftechnologyreadiness,orfixedcostcontractforprogramwithlowleveloftechnologyreadiness)
4.
Technologydevelopmentandintegration
4.1.
Technologymaturationmonitoring
123
Challenge #
4.1.1.
Noprocessimplementedtoassesstechnologymaturation
4.1.2.
Noadequateprocesstomaturetechnologiesforprograms(performanceandsystemintegrationproperties)
4.2.
Technologytransitionmanagement
4.2.1.
Noestablishedtechnologyinsertionprocess
4.2.2.
Noperson/teaminchargetomanageandmonitortechnologytransition
4.2.3.
Noformalreviewsandcommunicationplansfortechnologytransition
4.2.4.
Nooverallsystemoptimizationthattakesfulladvantageofnewtechnologies(instead,newtechnologiesareadapted
toexistingsystems)
4.2.5.
Differenttypesofnewtechnologyintegrationnotaddressedappropriately(hardwarehardware,hardwaresoftware,
softwaresoftwareetc.)
4.2.6.
Limitedengineeringexpertiseregardingnewtechnologies
4.2.7.
Intellectualpropertyissuesandconfidentialityregulationsbetweengovernment,contractor,andsuppliershinder
effectivetechnologydevelopmentandintegration
5.
Engineering,productdesignanddevelopment
5.1.
Engineeringteamorganization
5.1.1.
Insufficientintegratedproductteamstructure
5.1.2.
Noclearteamleadershipstructure
5.1.3.
Teamsworkpackage/prioritiesnotalignedwithoverallprogramgoals
5.1.4.
Lackofskillandfunctionaldiversitywithintheteams
5.1.5.
InefficientcommunicationflowtoandwithinIPTs
5.1.6.
Nobalancebetweenteamsandfunctions(onlyappliestoprogramswithmatrixorganizations)
5.1.7.
SystemarchitecturedoesnotsupportproductdevelopmentprocessorIPTs(complexorganizationsofteninstigate
overcomplicatedsystemdesigns)
5.1.8.
Nodiverselearningstrategies
5.2.
Productarchitecting
5.2.1.
InsufficientintegrationofprogrammanagementrequirementsintotheSEprocess
5.2.2.
Insufficientexplorationofalternativesolutions
5.2.3.
Mismatchbetweenprogramcharacteristicsandchosendevelopmentprocess
5.2.4.
ProgrammanagementexertspressureagainstuseofSEbestpractices(e.g.,pressuretopursuepointdesign,
neglectingofilities)
5.3.
Valuestreamoptimization
5.3.1.
Lackofunderstandingwhatwasteis
5.3.2.
Lackofunderstandingastohowtodealwithdifferenttypesofwaste
5.3.3.
Nounderstandingofcurrentvs.preferredvaluestream
5.3.4.
Nomechanismforvaluestreamimprovements
5.4.
Testingandprototyping
5.4.1.
Testingsetuporprototypedoesnotmatchtypeofinformationthatteamwantstogather
5.4.2.
Nobalanceregardingamountoftesting(toomuchortoolittle)
5.4.3.
Testingteamunawareofcriticalpropertiesofnewtechnology(e.g.,vibrationsensitivityisanissueinnew
technology,inadditiontothermalsensitivity)
5.4.4.
Testingprocessesandequipmentunfittotestnewtechnologies(e.g.,unabletomeasurenewcriticalpropertiesor
notsensitiveenough)
124
A.3
OverviewofProgramsUsedinValidationandasExamples
Whilenoprogramisperfect,anumberofprogramsstandoutasbestinclassexamples.Thoseexampleswere
usedinthisguideintwoways.First,tovalidatetherecommendedLeanEnablersbycheckingtowhatextentthe
LeanEnablerswereusedinsuccessfulprograms.Theresultsofthecontentanalysisofdocumentationonthese
programsarediscussedinSection1.4.Secondly,theprogramswereusedtogeneratesomeexamplesofthe
applicationoftheLeanEnablersforSection5.Whilesomeprogramswereusedforbothapplications,some
programswereusedsolelytogenerateexamplesinSection5.
A.3.1 ProgramsUsedforBothContentAnalysisandasExamples
AllbuttheCoastGuardDeepwaterprogramsarewinnersandfinalistsofPMIsProjectoftheYearAwardfrom
2001through2011.ThePMIProjectoftheYearAwardrecognizestheaccomplishmentsofaprojectandproject
teamforsuperiorperformanceandexemplaryexecutionofprojectmanagementusingprocessesand
approachesthatareconsistentwithAGuidetotheProjectManagementBodyofKnowledge(PMBOKGuide).
Projectsfromaroundtheworldareinvitedtoparticipate,regardlessofsize,industrytype,orlocation.
CoastGuardDeepwater
TheCoastGuardDeepwaterprogramwassetuptorenewtheU.S.CoastGuardfleetbyreplacingorupgrading
currentassets.Forthatpurpose,theCoastGuardspecifiedasetofmissionrequirements.Inasystemof
systemsacquisitionapproach,themaincontractorprovidedanintegratedsystemofassetsmeetingthese
missionrequirementsratherthanreplacesingleclassesofshipsoraircraftsinindividualacquisitions.
Source:GAO.(2006,April).GAO06546CoastGuard.ReportstoCongressionalRequesters.Washington,DC:
author,151.
PrairieWaters
Amassivedroughtfrom2002to2003depletedthewatersupplyinthecityofAurora,CO,USAtoanalltime
low,fallingtojust26%ofitstotalcapacity.Thecitywasleftwitha9monthsupplyofwaterforitscitizensfar
lessthanthe3to5yearsupplyitpreferstokeep.Officialsdecidedtoimplementaprojectthatwouldprevent
futuredroughtrelatedshortages.InAugust2005,theAuroraCityCouncillaunchedthePrairieWatersproject,
whichcalledfortheconstructionofnearly34miles(55km)of60in.(1.5m)pipeline,4pumpstations,anatural
purificationareaandoneoftheworldsmosttechnicallyadvancedwatertreatmentfacilities,handling50
milliongallons(189millionliters)perday.
Source:PMI(2011).ApplicationdocumentssubmittedbyAuroraWaterforthePrairieWatersProjecttoPMIfor
thePMIProjectoftheYearAward.Reviewedwithpermissionbytheauthors.
DallasCowboysStadium
ToprovidetheDallasCowboysfootballteamwithanewstadiumthatwouldshowcasetheirgamesinawaythat
matchestheirlargerthanlifereputation,andoffertheCityofDallasaflexiblevenueforhostingadiverse
varietyofeventsrangingfromrockconcertstorodeosandbasketballgamestoNFL'sSuperBowl,whichthe
stadiumhousedinFebruary2011,thestadium'sownersworkedcloselywiththebuilderstocreateastructure
thatoffersfirstclassamenitiesandflexiblefunctionality.The8yearprocesstoconstructthenewUS$1billion
DallasCowboysStadium(Arlington,TX,USA)involvedworkperformedbymorethan100subcontractorsand
2,200personnel,usingmaterialsfromvendorsin10U.S.statesand12countriestorealizeabuildingdesignthat
wasrevised300times.
125
Source:PMI(2010).ApplicationdocumentssubmittedbyManhattanConstructionCompanyfortheDallas
CowboysStadiumProjecttoPMIforthePMIProjectoftheYearAward.Reviewedwithpermissionbythe
authors.
FluorNewmontTSPowerPlant
AfterwinningtheUS$533millionbidtobuildacoalfiredpowerplantforNewmontNevadaEnergyInvestment
Ltd.,FluorCorporationwasjustaboutreadytokickofftheproject.Materialandlaborcostshadbeensteadily
rising,andtheIrving,TX,USAbasedcompanythoughtithadresearchedandpreparedforeveryconceivable
problemtheprojectmightface.ThenHurricaneKatrinahitandeventhoughthestormlandedmorethan1,500
miles(2,414kilometers)awayfromtheplantprojectsiteinruralNevada,USAitalteredeverything.Laborers
acrossthecountryflockedtotheravagedGulfCoast,leavingtheprojectscramblingtofilljobsattheprojects
remotedesertsite.Newmonthadlaunchedtheprojecttooffsetsoaringenergycostsatitsgoldmine25&of
thetotaloperationcostswenttopayingthepowerbill.Oncecompleted,the242megawattcoalplantwould
takethemineoffthelocalenergygrid,reducingNewmontspowercostsbyUS$60milliontoUS$70millionper
yearandcreatinganadditionalrevenuestreamfrompowersoldbacktothegrid.
Source:Gale,S.F.(2009,November).PowerPlayers.PMNetwork,23(11),3239.
BAAHeathrowAirportTerminal1Overhaul
Terminal1atLondon'sHeathrowAirportaccommodatesnearly20millioninternationaltravelersannually.
Althoughthecramped40yearoldstructurehadbeenalteredtocomplywithmorestringentpost9/11security
regulationsandtheneedsoflonghaultraffic,itwasinneedofamajoroverhaultoremoveasbestosandoffer
servicesappropriatefor21stcenturytravelers.Theprojectneededtobecompletedwithinaverytightand
nonnegotiabletimeframe.
Source:Wheatley,M.(2009,December).Terminalvelocity.PMNetwork.23(12),4045.
HatchLtd.QITFeretTitane
Oneofthegreatchallengesinimplementingupgradeprojectsiskeepingtheorganization'sgeneraloperations
runningwithoutinterruption.HatchLtd.,basedinOntario,Canada,implementedanupgradeprojectforthe
metallurgycompanyQITFeretTitane(Quebec,Canada)thatenabledQITtoincreaseitsoutputwithout
disruptingitsplant'sperformance.
Source:Jones,T.(2009,January).Theinvisiblehand.PMNetwork,23(1),3239.
FernaldFeedsMaterialsProductionCenterNuclearCleanup
TheclosureofacoldwarnuclearfacilityclosetoCincinnati,Ohio,USA,presentedoneofthelargest
environmentalcleanupoperationsinU.S.history.Bythetimetheprogramkickedoff,theareahadsuffered
significantcontaminationthatraisedpublicawareness.Managingtheseexternalstakeholdersprovedtobea
majorpoliticalchallengethroughouttheprogram.
Source:Hildebrand,C.(2009,January).TheCleanupAct.PMNetwork,23(1),pp.3239.
RockyFlatsPlant
Fornearly37years,theRockyFlatsPlantinGolden,CO,USA,servedasatopsecret,highsecuritynuclear
weaponsfacility.In1989,itabruptlystoppedmakingweapons,leavingbehindcontaminatedfacilities,soil,and
groundwater.Fiveyearslater,theU.S.DepartmentofEnergy(DOE)labeledthesiteoneofthecountrysmost
significantnuclearvulnerabilities.Thatsameyear,KaiserHillCo.LLC,inBroomfield,Colo.,USA,pickedupthe
126
contracttobegincleanupandstabilizationoftheplant.In2000,thecompanywonasecondcontracttofinish
theclosureandcleanupoftheentire6,245acresite,includingthe385acreindustrialarea.Thecompanywas
givenonlysixyearsanda$3.96billionbudgetataskthatmostthoughtimpossible.Infact,theDOEestimated
thattheprojectwouldtake70yearsandcost$36billion.Withthehelpofinnovativeinitiativessuchaspayfor
performanceincentives,thecompanyclosedtheplant14monthsaheadofscheduleandwasmorethan$553
millionunderbudget.Despitethehighriskenvironmenttheteamwasworkingin,therewerenomajorinjuries
duringthecourseoftheproject.
Source:Hunsberger,K.(2007,January).Findingclosure.PMNetwork,21(1),2837.
QuartierInternationaldeMontreal
In2001,noonewantedtoliveinthe66acreQuartierInternationaldeMontral.Anexpresswayactedasa
trench,turningthecitysinternationaldistrictintoadysfunctionalgapbetweenthehistoricdistrict,Old
Montral,andthebusinessdistrict.Today,becauseofamassiveurbanrevitalizationproject,theareaisa
thrivingdestinationforbothlocalsandtourists.Housingisbooming,also.Therearemorethan1,000newunits
completedorunderconstruction.Rrecently,acondominiumsoldfor$2.5millionand,overall,theproject
generated$770millioninrelatedconstruction.Theaimofthe$90million,5yearQuartierinternationalde
Montral(QIM)projectwastwofold:increaseaccesstotheareaandbuildoutthespacewithqualitydesignand
qualitymaterials.
Source:Ellis,L.(2006,January).Urbaninspiration.PMNetwork,20(1),2834.
HaradhGasPlant
Amassiveconstructionproject,builtinoneofthemostremoteplacesonearth,delivered6monthsaheadof
scheduleand27%underbudgettheHaradhGasPlantresultsspeakforthemselves.TheHaradhGasPlant,
locatedontheedgeoftheRubalKhalidesert,thelargestareaofcontinuoussandintheworld,wasfullyonline
inJune2003.Itwastheresultofa4yearprojectthatrequired51millionconstructionmanhours,including49
millionhourswithoutalostworkdayincident.SaudiAramcoachievedtheseoutstandingresultsbyapplying
recognizedprojectmanagementprocessesandmethodologies.ThesecondinaseriesofmajorSaudiAramco
projectsdesignedtoexpandtheprocessingcapabilitiesoftheregionsplantsandmeetincreasingdemandfor
naturalgas,theHaradhGasPlanthasafeedrateof1.6billionstandardcubicfeetperdayanda1.5billioncubic
feetperdaysalescapacitythemostofanyexistingSaudiAramcoplant.LiketheHawiyahGasPlant,Haradhis
partofanewgenerationofgasprocessingplantsthatreceiveasweeter,nonassociatedgasmixturethat
producesmorehydrocarboncondensatethanprocessingplantsdealingwithonlysourassociatedgasstreams.
Source:Haynes,M.(2005,January).Thewinningdrill.PMNetwork,19(1),2833.
SaltLakeCity,UtahWinterOlympics
Itwas5yearsinthemakingandthe$1.9billion2002OlympicWinterandParalympicGameswereamassive
undertaking,encompassing78Olympicand15Paralympicevents.Whileathleteswerethestarperformers,
projectmanagersseamlesslydeliveredworldclassgames.AftertheawardoftheParalympicGamestoUtahin
1997,theSaltLakeOrganizingCommittee(SLOC)begancoordinatingwithfederalandstateagenciestoplanthe
neededinfrastructure,includinganI15highwayexpansion,theUtahDepartmentofTransportationsTraffic
OperationsCenter,andkeyhighwayinterchangeimprovements.Atthestart,mostOlympicmanagingdirectors
viewedprojectmanagementandqualityassuranceasdirectlyapplicableonlytolargeconstructionrelated
projects,technicaldevelopmentprograms,andotherfiniteandeasilyquantifiedactivities.Projectmanagement
contributedtoturninga$400milliondeficitintoa$100millionsurplus.
Source:Foti,R.(2009,January).ThebestWinterOlympics,period.PMNetwork,18(1).2228.
127
HawiyahGasPlant
In1996,theHawiyahGasProgramwaslaunched36mi(60km)southofUdhailiyahinSaudiArabiaseastern
province.Thenewplantwastoreceivesweet(lowsulfur)gasfromtheJaufreservoirandsourKhuffgasfrom
wellsintheHawiyahfields.ThisprogramwasdesignedtospeeddevelopmentofSaudiAramcosnonassociated
gasresources(produceddirectlyfromgasreservoirsandnotasasecondaryproductofoilproduction)andto
liberatemajorquantitiesofoilforexport.Withincreasednaturalgascapacity,anumberoflocalindustries,
includingtheKingdomsnationalelectriccompany,wouldbeabletotransitiontonaturalgas.Thismonumental
taskinvolvedglobalsuppliers,morethan10,000workersof50differentnationalities,andgovernment
supervisionandsupport.Despitethechallengesofworkingonaprojectofthismagnitude,theSaudiAramco
projectmanagementorganizationdeliveredtheplantmorethan$200millionunderbudgetand4monthsahead
ofschedule.
Source:Foti,R.(2003,January).PMI2002ProjectoftheYear:SaudiAramco'sHawiyahgasplant.PMNetwork,
17(1),2027.
MozalSmelter
TheMozalProjectincludedtheconstructionofa250,000tonperannumprimaryaluminumsmelterlocated
10.5mi(17km)westoftheMaputocitycenterinMozambique,oneofabout30countriesthatproduces
aluminum.WithabudgetatmorethanUS$1.3billion,theprojectreportedlyrepresentsthelargestsingle
foreigndirectinvestmentinMozambique.Confrontedwithintimidatingtechnicalandlogisticalchallenges,with
poorlydevelopedindustrialinfrastructureandcivilengineeringcapacityanddespiteswarmsofmosquitoes
andtheworstfloodsimaginabletheMozalSmelterProjectdeliveredaproductivealuminumsmelteraheadof
scheduleandunderbudget.
Source:Williams,E.(2002,January).TheMozalsmelterproject,riverofaluminum.PMNetwork.Vol.16,no.1
(Jan.2002),p.2026
TrojanReactorVessel
Itwasanambitiousprojectfromthestart:toremove,transport,anddisposeofafullsizedcommercialnuclear
reactor,completewithitsinternalstructuresandladenwithradioactivityfrom19yearsinservice,andpackaged
inonepieceforshipment,whichweighedmorethantwomillionpounds.Thisapproachofferedmany
advantagesovertheconventionalmethodofsegmentingthereactoranditsinternalstructuresforupto88
separateshipmentsfordisposal.Removingthereactorvesselasawholewouldexposeworkersandthepublic
toafractionofthepotentialradiation.Itwouldresultinlessthanhalftheradioactivewasteandallofthatata
lowlevelofradioactivity.Itwouldrealizesome$15millioninsavings.Therewasonemajorobstaclefacingthe
TrojanReactorVesselandInternalsRemoval(RVAIR)Projectteamithadneverbeendonebefore.Many
doubtedthatitcouldbedone.Notonlywastheprojectsuccessfullyaccomplished,thecostswereUS$15million
lessthanoriginallyprojectedandUS$19millionlessthanconventionalonsitereactorremovalmethods.
Source:Holtzman,J.(2001,January).TheTrojanreactorvesselandinternalsremovalproject.PMNetwork,
15(1),2832.
A.3.2 ProgramsusedSolelyasExamples
AnumberofprogramswereusedasexamplesthroughoutSection5.Whileseveralexamplesrelyonthe
experiencereportedbythesubjectmatterexpertsduringtheworkofthegroup,additionalinformationand
resourcesavailableforsomeofthereportedprogramsareincludedhere.
128
MITREIdentifiedBestinClassPrograms
ResearchersatMITREpublishedareportthatidentifiessuccesspatternsinthesystemsengineeringoflargeIT
acquisitionprograms.Itisbasedonanindepthanalysisof12highlysuccessfulprograms.Fourofthese
programsareusedasexamplesinthisdocument:
1.
2.
3.
4.
AProductLineTailoredtoUsers:Thisprogramwassetuptobuildafamilyofproductstoservemultiple
usersperformingasimilarfunctioninvariousuniqueways.Itdeliveredaninformationinfrastructure
andaproductlineofpluginmodules.
CuttingEdgeTechnologyDevelopment:ThisU.S.governmentprovidedasinglefunctionwithhigh
technology,expensive,piecepartstoasmallcommunityofusers.Thegovernment'ssystemengineering
workforceconsistedof150individualsfromseveralgovernmentandquasigovernmentorganizations.
IntegratingDisparateElements:ThisU.S.governmentprogramwasanattempttobuildaseamless
networkofcooperatingusers,linkingtheirsystemsthoughanewserviceorientedarchitecture.These
systemswereexpensive,andtheuserswerenotaccustomedtosharinginformation.Theintegration
effortprovidedatremendouscostsavingsordersofmagnitudelessthaneachofthedisparatesystem
programs.Thusthechallengeswereasmuchsocialastechnical.
SophisticatedWorldwidePlanning:ThisU.S.governmentITprogramdeliveredacollectionofsoftware
componentstoperformsophisticatedplanning,execution,andassessmentofoperations.Itoperated
withhundredsofusersinaboutonedozenlocationsaroundtheworld.
Source:Rebovich,G.,&DeRosa,J.(2011).PatternsofsuccessinsystemsengineeringAcquisitionofITintensive
governmentsystems.MITRETechnicalPaper.McLean,VA:MITRECorp.
SiemensExamples
Anumberofexamplesrelatedtobestprogrammanagementpracticeshavebeenidentifiedandimplementedat
Siemensinthepastyears.Thesefindingsaredocumentedinthefollowingtwosources.
Source:Sopko,J.A.,Yellayi,S.andClark,S(2012).AnOrganizationsJourneytoAchieveBusinessExcellence
ThroughOPMMaturity.2012PMIGlobalCongressProceedings,Marseille,France
Source:Sopko,J.A.,&Strausser,G.(2010).Thevalueoforganizationalprojectmanagement(OPM)maturity
Understanding,measuring,anddeliveringbenefits.2010PMIGlobalCongressProceedings,Washington,DC.
ToyotaExamples
TheToyotaexamplesweredrawnfromthefollowingpublication:
Source:Morgan,J.,&Liker,J.K.(2006).TheToyotaproductdevelopmentsystem:Integratingpeople,process,
andtechnology.,NewYork,NY:ProductivityPress.
FordExamples
TheFordexamplesweretakenfromthefollowingpublication:
Source:Liker,J.K.,&Morgan,J.(2011).Leanproductdevelopmentasasystem:Acasestudyofbodyand
stampingdevelopmentatFord.EngineeringManagementJournal,23(1),1628.
129
A.4
ReferenceListofLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms
TableA2isasimplifiedsummarylistofallLeanEnablerspresentedinSection5.
TableA2:ReferenceListofLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms
#
Enabler and Subenabler
Page
1.
35
1.1.
1.1.1.
Understandthatprogramsfailorsucceedprimarilybasedonpeople,notprocess.Treatpeopleasthemost
valuedassets,notascommodities.
1.1.2.
Investinpeopleselectionanddevelopmenttoaddressenterpriseandprogramexcellence.Ensurethatthe
hiringprocessmatchestherealneedsoftheprogramfortalentandskill.
1.1.3.
Programleadershipmustactasamentorandprovideamodelfordesiredbehaviorintheentireprogram
team,suchastrust,respect,honesty,empowerment,teamwork,stability,motivationanddrivefor
excellence.
1.1.4.
Hirepeoplebasedonpassion,"sparkleintheeye,"andbroadprofessionalknowledgenotbasedsolelyon
veryspecificskillneeds(i.e.,hirefortalent,trainforskills).Donotdelegatethiscriticaltasktocomputers
scanningforkeywords.
1.1.5.
Rewardbaseduponteamperformanceandincludeteamingabilityamongthecriteriaforhiringand
promotion.Encourageteambuildingandteamwork.
1.1.6.
Practicewalkaroundmanagement."Donotmanagefromacubicle;gototheworkandseeforyourself.
1.1.7.
Buildacultureofmutualtrustandsupport(thereisnoshameinaskingforhelp).
1.1.8.
Promoteclosecollaborationandrelationshipbetweeninternalcustomersandsuppliers.Donotallow"lone
wolfbehavior."
1.1.9.
Whenstaffingthetopleadershippositions(includingtheprogrammanager),chooseteamplayersand
collaborativelymindedindividualsoverperfectlookingcredentialsonpaper.
1.1.10.
Whenresolvingissues,attacktheproblemnotthepeople.
1.2.
1.2.1.
Createasharedvisionwhichdrawsoutandinspiresthebestinpeople.
1.2.2.
Ensureeveryonecanseehowtheirowncontributionscontributetothesuccessoftheprogramvision.
1.3.
1.3.1.
Useandcommunicateflowdownofresponsibility,authorityandaccountability(RAA)tomakedecisionsat
lowestappropriatelevel.
1.3.2.
Eliminatefearfromtheworkenvironment.Promoteconflictresolutionatthelowestlevel.
1.3.3.
Allowacertainamountof"failure"inacontrolledenvironmentatlowerlevels,sothatpeoplecantakerisk
andgrowbyexperience.
1.3.4.
Withinprogrampolicyandwithintheirareaofwork,empowerpeopletoacceptresponsibilityandtake
action.Promotethemottoratheraskforforgivenessthanpermission.
1.3.5.
Keepmanagementdecisionscrystalclearwhilealsoempoweringandrewardingthebottomupcultureof
continuousimprovementandhumancreativityandentrepreneurship.
1.4.
1.4.1.
Establishandsupportcommunitiesofpractice.
1.4.2.
Investinworkforcedevelopment.
1.4.3.
EnsuretailoredLeantrainingforallemployees.
1.4.4.
GiveleadersatalllevelsindepthLeantraining.
1.4.5.
Promoteandhonorprofessionalmeritocracy.
1.4.6.
Establishahighlyexperiencedcoregroup(grayhairs)thatleadsbyexampleandinstitutionalizespositive
behavior.
130
Page
1.4.7.
Perpetuateprofessionalexcellencethroughmentoring,friendlypeerreview,training,continuingeducation,
andothermeans.
1.5.
1.5.1.
Promoteandrewardcontinuouslearningthrougheducationandexperientiallearning.
1.5.2.
Provideeasyaccesstoknowledgeexpertsasresourcesandformentoring,including"friendlypeerreview."
1.5.3.
Valuepeoplefortheunconventionalideastheycontributetotheprogramwithmutualrespectand
appreciation.
1.5.4.
Captureandsharetacitknowledgetostabilizetheprogramwhenteammemberschange.
1.5.5.
Developstandardspayingattentiontohumanfactors,includinglevelofexperienceandperceptionabilities.
1.5.6.
Immediatelyorganizequicktraininginanynewstandardtoensurebuyinandawareness.
1.6.
Encouragepersonalnetworksandinteractions
1.6.1.
Preferphysicalteamcolocationtovirtualcolocation.
1.6.2.
Forvirtuallycolocatedteams,investtimeandmoneyupfronttobuildpersonalrelationshipsinfacetoface
settings.
1.6.3.
Promotedirecthumancommunicationtobuildpersonalrelationships.
1.6.4.
Engageinboundaryspanningactivitiesacrossorganizationsintheenterprise(e.g.,valuestreammapping).
1.6.5.
Engageandsustainextensivestakeholderinteractions.
1.6.6.
Supportthedevelopmentofinformalandsocialnetworkswithintheprogramandtokeystakeholdersinthe
programenvironment.
1.6.7.
Encourage(anddocumentwhenappropriate)openinformationsharingwithintheprogram.
1.6.8.
Programmanagermusthaverespectandpersonalrelationshipwithallfourmainstakeholdergroups:
customers,superiors,programemployees,andkeycontractors/suppliers.
2.
44
2.1.
2.1.1.
Definevalueastheoutcomeofanactivitythatsatisfiesatleastthreeconditions:
1.Externalcustomerstakeholdersarewillingtopayforvalue.
2.Transformsinformationormaterialorreducesuncertainty.
3.Providesspecifiedprogrambenefitsrightthefirsttime.
2.1.2.
Definevalueaddedintermsofvaluetothecustomerstakeholdersandtheirneeds.
2.1.3.
Developarobustprocesstocapture,develop,anddisseminatecustomerstakeholdervaluewithextreme
clarity.
2.1.4.
Proactivelyresolvepotentialconflictingstakeholdervaluesandexpectations,andseekconsensus.
2.1.5.
Explaincustomerstakeholderculturetoprogramemployees,thatis,thevaluesystem,approach,attitude,
expectations,andissues.
2.2.
2.2.1.
Allprogramactivities,includingcommunicationsandmetrics,mustbefocusedontheintendedoutcomesof
theprogramtheprogramsplannedbenefits.
2.2.2.
Alignprogramresourcestoachieveplannedbenefitsandincorporateactivitiesthatwillenablethebenefits
achievedtobesustainedfollowingthecloseoftheprogram.
2.2.3.
Ensureprogramstaffandteamsfullyunderstandhowprogramexecutionandbenefitsrelatetohighlevel
organizationalgoals(e.g.,competitivenessandprofitability).
2.3.
2.3.1.
Everyoneinvolvedintheprogrammusthaveacustomerfirstspirit,focusingontheclearlydefinedprogram
valueandrequirements.
2.3.2.
Establishfrequentandeffectiveinteractionwithinternalandexternalstakeholders.
2.3.3.
Pursueaprogramvisionandarchitecturethatcapturescustomerstakeholderrequirementsclearlyandcan
beadaptivetochanges.
131
Page
2.3.4.
Establishaplanthatdelineatestheartifactsandinteractionsthatprovidethebestmeansfordrawingout
customerstakeholderrequirements.
2.3.5.
Structurecommunicationamongstakeholders(who,howoften,andwhat).
2.3.6.
Createsharedunderstandingofprogramcontent,goals,statusandchallengesamongkeystakeholders.
2.3.7.
Communicateaccomplishmentsandmajorobstacleswithstakeholdersregularlyandwithtransparency.
2.3.8.
Buildtrustandhealthyrelationshipswithstakeholdersbyestablishingopencommunicationandearly
engagementwiththeprogramplanningandexecution.
2.3.9.
Listentothestakeholderscommentsandconcernspatientlyandvaluetheirviewsandinputs.
2.3.10.
Clearlytrackassumptionsandenvironmentalconditionsthatinfluencestakeholderrequirementsandtheir
perceptionofprogrambenefits.
2.3.11.
Useprogramcomponentselectionandreviewwiththekeystakeholdersasanopportunitytocontinuously
focustheprogramonbenefitsdelivery.
2.4.
processbegins.
2.4.1.
Ensurethatthecustomerlevelrequirementsdefinedintherequestforproposal(RFP)orcontractsaretruly
representativeoftheneed:stable,complete,crystalclear,deconflicted,freeofwastefulspecifications,and
assimpleaspossible.
2.4.2.
Useonlyhighlyexperiencedpeopleandexpertinstitutionstowriteprogramrequirements,RFPs,and
contracts.
2.4.3.
Ifthecustomerlackstheexpertisetodevelopclearrequirements,issueacontracttoaproxyorganization
withtoweringexperienceandexpertisetosortoutandmaturetherequirementsandspecificationsinthe
RFP.Thisproxymustremainaccountableforthequalityoftherequirements,includingpersonal
accountability.
2.4.4.
Preventcarelessinsertionofmutuallycompetingandconflictingrequirements,excessivenumberof
requirements,standards,andrulestobefollowedintheprogram,forexamplemindless"cutandpaste"of
requirementsfrompreviousprograms.
2.4.5.
Minimizethetotalnumberofrequirements.Includeonlythosethatareneededtocreatevaluetothe
2.4.6.
Insistthatasinglepersonisinchargeoftheentireprogramrequirementstoassureconsistencyand
efficiencythroughout.
2.4.7.
Requirepersonalandinstitutionalaccountabilityofthereviewersofrequirementsuntilprogramsuccessis
demonstrated.
2.4.8.
Alwaysclearlylinkrequirementstospecificcustomerstakeholderneedsandtracerequirementsfromtop
leveltobottomlevel.
2.4.9.
Usepeerreviewrequirementsamongstakeholderstoensureconsensusvalidityandabsenceofconflicts.
2.4.10.
Requireanindependentmandatoryreviewoftheprogramrequirements,conceptofoperation,andother
relevantspecificationsofvalueforclarity,lackofambiguity,lackofconflicts,stability,completeness,and
generalreadinessforcontractingandeffectiveprogramexecution.
2.4.11.
Clearlyarticulatethetoplevelobjectives,value,programbenefitsandfunctionalrequirementsbefore
formalrequirementsorarequestforproposalisissued.
2.4.12.
Useacleardecisiongatethatreviewsthematurityofrequirements,thetradeoffsbetweentoplevel
objectives,aswellasthelevelofremainingrequirementsrisksbeforedetailedformalrequirementsora
requestforproposalisissued.
2.5.
2.5.1.
DevelopanAgileprocesstoanticipate,accommodate,andcommunicatechangingcustomerrequirements.
2.5.2.
Followupwrittenrequirementswithverbalclarificationofcontextandexpectationstoensuremutual
understandingandagreement.Keeptherecordsinwriting,sharethediscusseditemsanddonotallow
requirementscreep.
132
Page
2.5.3.
Usearchitecturalmethodsandmodelingtocreateastandardprogramsystemrepresentation(3Dintegrated
CAEtoolset,mockups,prototypes,models,simulations,andsoftwaredesigntools)thatallowinteractions
withcustomersandotherstakeholdersasthebestmeansofdrawingoutrequirements.
2.5.4.
Listenforandcaptureunspokencustomerrequirements.
2.5.5.
Toalignstakeholders,identifyasmallnumberofprimarygoalsandobjectivesthatrepresenttheprogram
mission,howitwillachieveitsbenefits,andwhatthesuccesscriteriawillbetoalignstakeholders.Repeat
thesegoalsandobjectivesconsistentlyandoften.
2.5.6.
Activelypromotethematurationofstakeholderrequirements,e.g.,byprovidingdetailedtradeoffstudies,
feasibilitystudies,andvirtualprototypes.
2.5.7.
Facilitatecommunicationbetweendifferentandpossiblydivergingstakeholderstodevelopashared
understandingoftheprogramamongthestakeholders,clearlyidentifyingandincorporatingthevarious
interestsofdifferentstakeholders(aligned,indifferent,oropposed),andestablishtrust.
2.5.8.
Createeffectivechannelsforclarificationofrequirements(e.g.,involvingcustomerstakeholdersinprogram
teams).
2.5.9.
Failearlyandfailoftenthroughrapidlearningtechniques(e.g.,prototyping,tests,simulations,digital
models,orspiraldevelopment).
2.5.10.
EmployAgilemethodstomanagenecessaryrequirementschangeandmaketheprogramdeliverablesrobust
againstthosechanges.Makebothprogramprocessesandprogramdeliverablesreusable,reconfigurable,
andscalable.
2.6.
Activelyminimizethebureaucratic,regulatoryandcomplianceburdenontheprogramandsubprojects.
2.6.1.
Strivetominimizeandstreamlinetheburdenofpaperworkforexternalstakeholdersbyactivelyengaging
themintheprocessandclearlyarticulatingandaligningthebenefitgeneratedbyeachreport.
2.6.2.
Minimizeandstreamlinetheprograminternalreportingforprogramactivitiesandsubprojectsbyoptimizing
theinternalreportingrequirements.Requireonlythosereportsthatareclearlynecessaryandalignreporting
requirementstoreduceredundantreporting.
2.6.3.
Ensureallreviewandapprovalstepsaretrulyneededandvalueaddingintheprogram.
3.
53
3.1.
3.1.1.
Plantodeveloponlywhatneedstobedeveloped.
3.1.2.
Promotereuseandsharingofprogramassets.Utilizestandards,standardprocesses,modulesofknowledge,
technicalstandardizationandplatforms,andsoftwarelibraries.
3.1.3.
Havecrossfunctionalstakeholdersandprogramleadershipworktogethertobuildtheagreedvaluestream.
3.1.4.
Useformalvaluestreammappingmethodstoidentifyandeliminatemanagementandengineeringwaste,
andtotailorandscaletasks.
3.2.
ActivelyArchitectandmanagetheprogramenterprisetooptimizeitsperformanceasasystem.
3.2.1.
Keepactivitiesduringearlyprogramphasesinternalandcolocated,asthereisahighneedforcoordination.
3.2.2.
Setupasingle,colocatedorganizationtohandletheentiresystemsengineeringandarchitectingforthe
entireeffortthroughoutthelifecycle,inordertoincreaseRAA.
3.2.3.
Ensurethatsystemsengineeringandarchitectingareacentralpartofprogrammanagementandnot
outsourcedorsubcontracted,astheseactivitiesrequireahighlevelofcoordination.
3.2.4.
Developaclearvisionandholisticviewofthefuturestateoftheprogramenterprise,includingthefuture
portfolioofproducts,thefutureorganization,andthefuturevaluestream.Provideguidanceonaclearpath
forwardandensurethatresourcesarealignedwiththisvision.
3.2.5.
Useacleararchitecturaldescriptionoftheagreedsolutiontoplancoherentprograms,engineering,and
commercialstructures.
3.2.6.
Changetheprogrammindsettofocusontheentireprogramenterpriseandthevalueitdeliverstocustomer
stakeholders.
3.2.7.
Leadandsustainthetransformationtoanintegratedprogrammanagementandsystemsengineering
enterpriseacrosscustomerandsupplierorganizations.
133
Page
3.2.8.
Insistonadoptinganadaptivearchitecturethatmeetstheoperationalneeds,whilenotcateringtoany
proprietarytechnologiesorcapabilitiesofpotentialcontractors.
3.3.
Pursuemultiplesolutionsetsinparallel
3.3.1.
Plantoutilizecrossfunctionalteamsmadeupofthemostexperiencedandcompatiblepeopleatthestartof
theprojecttolookatabroadrangeofsolutionsets.
3.3.2.
Explorethetradespaceandmarginsfullybeforefocusingonapointdecisionandtoosmallmargins.
3.3.3.
Forkeydecisions,explorealternativeoptionsinparallelaslongasfeasible.Forexample,usethemethodof
SetBasedConcurrentEngineering.
3.3.4.
Exploremultipleconcepts,architectures,anddesignsearly.
3.3.5.
Exploreconstraintsandperformrealtradesbeforeconvergingonapointdesign.
3.3.6.
Allotherthingsbeingequal,selectthesimplestsolution.
3.4.
3.4.1.
Ensurestrongcorporate,institutional,andpersonalaccountabilityandpersonalpenaltiesfor"lowballing"of
thebudget,schedule,andriskandoverestimatingcapabilities(e.g.,thetechnologyreadinesslevels(TRL))in
ordertowinthecontract.
3.4.2.
If"lowballing"isdetectedonafixedpricecontract,insistoncontinuingthefixedpricecontract,orprogram
terminationandrebid.Donotallowswitchingatocostpluscontract.
3.4.3.
Ensurethatplannersandcostestimatorsareheldresponsiblefortheirestimatesduringtheexecutionofthe
program.Minimizetheriskofwishfulthinking.
3.5.
3.5.1.
Planearlyforconsistentrobustnessandrightthefirsttimeunder"normal"circumstances,insteadofhero
behaviorinlater"crisis"situations.
3.5.2.
Upfrontintheprogram,dedicateenoughtimeandresourcestounderstandwhatthekeyrequirementsand
intendedprogrambenefitsreallyare.
3.5.3.
Establishasystemandprocessthatallowscomprehensive,effective,andefficientupfrontplanningofthe
programbeforeexecutionbegins.
3.5.4.
Theprogramleadershipteam(programmanager,technicalmanagers,andleadsystemengineers,etc.)must
identifykeystakeholdersthatwillbeinvolvedthroughouttheprogramlifecyclebeforetheprogram
executionbegins.
3.5.5.
Holdaprogramkickoffmeetingwithkeystakeholdersthatidentifiestheprogrambenefitsandthekey
mechanismstorealizethesebenefits(e.g.,valuestreammapping),identifyandassignrolesand
responsibilities,identifykeydependenciesandrisksinprogram,setkeymilestones,andestablishanaction
plan.
3.5.6.
Propagatefrontloadingoftheprogramthroughoutcriticalsubprojectswithsimilarworkshopstothose
describedin3.5.5..
3.5.7.
Ascertainwhatisavailabletotheprogram(e.g.,resources,talent,budget,andtimeline)andwhatisnot
availablepriortomakingacommitmenttothecustomersandotherstakeholders.
3.5.8.
HoldLeanacceleratedplanningsessionsattheprogramlevelandforkeysubprojects,engagingall
stakeholdersindevelopingamasterschedule,valuestreammap,risksandopportunities,keyassumptions,
andactionitems.
3.5.9.
Forallcriticalactivities,definewhoisresponsibleforapproving,supporting,andinforming(alsoknownas
RACImatrix),usingastandardizedtoolandpayingattentiontotheprecedenceoftasksanddocumenting
handoffs.
3.5.10.
Transitionthefrontloadingoftheprogramandkeyprojectsintoacontinuousplanningandimprovement
processwithregularworkshops.
3.5.11.
Anticipateandplantoresolveasmanydownstreamissuesandrisksasearlyaspossibletoprevent
downstreamproblems.
3.5.12.
Includeadetailedriskandopportunityidentification,assessment,andmitigationintheearlyprogram
planningphases.
134
Page
3.5.13.
Ensurethattechnicalchallengeswithintheprogramareadequatelyaddressedbymanagementstaffduring
theplanningprocess.
3.5.14.
Theprogrammanagermustpersonallyunderstand,clarify,andremoveambiguity,conflicts,andwastefrom
keyrequirementsandexpectationsattheprogramstart.
3.5.15.
Heavilyinvolvethekeysuppliersinprogramplanningandattheearlyphasesofprogram.
3.6.
3.6.1.
Developprobabilisticestimatesforcost,scheduleandothercriticalplanningforecasts.
3.6.2.
Baseplanningassumptionsonconfidenceintervals,notonpointestimates.
3.7.
Workwithsupplierstoproactivelyavoidconflict,andanticipateandmitigateprogramrisk.
3.7.1.
Permitoutsourcingandsubcontractingonlyforprogramelementsthatareperfectlydefinedandstable.Do
notsubcontractearlyprogramphaseswhentheneedforclosecoordinationisthestrongest.
3.7.2.
Havethesuppliersbrieftheprogrammanagementteamoncurrentandfuturecapabilitiesduringconceptual
programphases.
3.7.3.
Engagesuppliersearlyintheprogramtoidentifyandmitigatecriticalsupplierrelatedrisks.
3.7.4.
Respectyourextendednetworkofpartnersandsuppliersbychallengingthemandhelpingthemimprove.
3.7.5.
Streamlinesupplychainprocessesandfocusonjustintimeoperationsthatminimizeinventorycarrying
costs.
3.7.6.
Whendefiningrequirementsetsformultiplesuppliers,ensurethattheyareindependentofeachother,in
ordertominimizeriskandreducetheneedtomanagedependenciesamongsuppliers.
3.7.7.
Communicatetosupplierswithcrystalclarityallexpectations,includingthecontextandneed,andall
proceduresandexpectationsforacceptancetests;andensuretherequirementsarestable.
3.7.8.
Selectsupplierswhoaretechnicallyandculturallycompatible.
3.7.9.
Strivetodevelopaseamlesspartnershipbetweensuppliersandtheproductdevelopmentteam.
3.7.10.
Includeandmanagethemajorsuppliersasapartofyourteam.
3.7.11.
InvitesuppliersastrustedprogrampartnerstomakeaseriouscontributiontoSE,design,anddevelopment.
3.7.12.
Trustengineerstocommunicatewithsuppliers'engineersdirectlyforefficientclarification,withina
frameworkofrules,butwatchforhighriskitems,whichmustbehandledatthetoplevel.
3.8.
3.8.1.
Useleadingindicatorstoenableactionbeforerisksbecomeissues.
3.8.2.
Focusmetricsaroundcustomerstakeholdervalueandprogrambenefits.
3.8.3.
Useonlyfewsimpleandeasytounderstandmetricsandsharethemfrequentlythroughouttheenterprise.
3.8.4.
Usemetricsstructuredtomotivatetherightbehavior.Beverycarefultoavoidtheunintendedconsequences
thatcomefromthewrongmetricsincentivizingundesirablebehavior.
3.8.5.
Useonlythosemetricsthatmeetastatedneed,objective,orprogrambenefit.
3.9.
Developanintegratedprogramscheduleatthelevelofdetailforwhichyouhavedependableinformation.
3.9.1.
Createaplantoappropriatelyintegrateandalignprogrammanagement,systemsengineering,andother
highlevelplanningandcoordinationfunctions.
3.9.2.
Maximizeconcurrencyofindependenttasksandtasksthatinformeachother.
3.9.3.
Synchronizeworkflowactivitiesusingschedulingacrossfunctions,andevenmoredetailedschedulingwithin
functions.
3.9.4.
Planbelowfullcapacitytoenableflowofworkwithoutaccumulationofvariability,andpermitscheduling
flexibilityinworkloading,thatis,haveappropriatecontingenciesandschedulebuffers.
3.9.5.
Planforlevelworkflowandwithprecisiontoenablescheduleadherenceanddriveoutarrivaltimevariation.
3.9.6.
Carefullyplanforprecedenceofengineeringandmanagementtasks(whichtasktofeedwhatothertasks
andwithwhatdataandwhen),understandingtaskdependenciesandparentchildrelationships.
135
Page
3.9.7.
Updatedetailedplanningregularlytoreflectnewinformation,beingconsistentwiththelongtermstrategic
plan.Donotforceprogramstoexecuteagainstadetailed,outdatedplanthatwasdeveloped,basedon
incompleteinformation.
3.10.
3.10.1.
Createtransparencyregardingthetechnologyrisksandassociatedcostandschedulerisksbeforelargescale
programsarecontracted.Issuesmallcontractstomaturecriticaltechnologiesbeforestartingalargescale
program.
3.10.2.
Instituteclearguidelinesfortechnologymaturationandinsertionprocessinyourprogram.Clearlydefine
whattypeandleveloftechnology,cost,andscheduleriskisacceptableunderwhatcircumstances(paralysis
byanalysisvs.programfailure).
3.10.3.
Fullyunderstandboththerisksandopportunitiesinvolvedintheuseofnew/immaturetechnologiesand
newengineering/manufacturingprocesses.
3.10.4.
Utilizeprogrammanagementstrategiesthatproducethebestbalancebetweentechnologyriskandreward
inyourprogram,suchasevolutionaryacquisitionandincrementalorspiraldevelopment.
3.10.5.
Extensivelyuseriskmanagementtoacceptappropriatelevelsoftechnologyriskandensuresufficient
mitigationactionsareinplace.
3.10.6.
Removeshowstoppingresearchandunproventechnologyfromthecriticalpathoflargeprograms.Issue
separatedevelopmentcontracts,staffwithcolocatedexperts,andincludeitintheriskmitigationplan.
Reexamineforintegrationintotheprogramaftersignificantprogresshasbeenmadeordefertofuture
systems.
3.10.7.
Providestablefundingfortechnologydevelopmentandmaturation.Thiswillsupportasteady,planned
pipelineofnewtechnologiestobeinsertedintotheprogram.
3.10.8.
Matchtechnologiestoprogramrequirements.Donotexceedprogramneedsbyusingunnecessarily
exquisitetechnologies("goldplating").
3.10.9.
Performrobustsystemarchitectingandrequirementsanalysistodeterminetechnologyneedsandcurrent
technologyreadinesslevels.
3.10.10.
Ensureclear,programwideunderstandingofagreedupontechnologiesandtechnologystandards.
3.10.11.
Utilizeindependenttechnicalreviewstoconfirmacapabilitytodeliverandintegrateanynewtechnology
thatcoulddelaytheprogramorcausescheduleoverruns.
3.11.
3.11.1.
Developandexecuteaclearcommunicationsplanthatcoverstheentirevaluestreamandstakeholders.
3.11.2.
Plantousevisualmethodswhereverpossibletocommunicateschedules,workloads,changestocustomer
requirements,etc.
4.
68
4.1.
4.1.1.
Seamlesslyandconcurrentlyengagesystemsengineerswithallengineeringphasesfromthepreproposal
phasetothefinalprogramdelivery.
4.1.2.
Maintainteamcontinuitybetweenphasestomaximizeexperientiallearning,includingpreproposaland
proposalphases.
4.2.
4.2.1.
Nominateapermanent,experiencedprogrammanagerfullyresponsibleandaccountableforsuccessofthe
entireprogramlifecycle,withcompleteauthorityoverallaspectsoftheprogram(businessandtechnical).
4.2.2.
Ensurecontinuityintheprogrammanagerpositionandavoidpersonnelrotation.
4.2.3.
DefineandclearlycommunicatetheprogrammanagersRAAacrossallstakeholders.
4.2.4.
Holdpeopleresponsiblefortheircontributionsthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.Upstreamactivitiesmust
beheldresponsibleforissuestheycauseindownstreamactivities.
136
Page
4.2.5.
Inthetoplevelprogrammanagementteamanddecisionmaking,thedifferentroles(e.g.,businessand
technical)mustexhibitahighlevelofteamwork,understanding,andappreciationforthenecessitiesineach
other'sdomain.
4.2.6.
Developaprocesstoensurethetimelyandflawlesscoordination,interface,andhandoff(ifneeded)ofRAA
amongrelevantprogramstakeholdersandexecutionteamsthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.
4.3.
4.3.1.
Groomanexceptionalprogrammanagerwithadvancedskillstoleadthedevelopment,thepeople,and
ensureprogramsuccess.
4.3.2.
Ensurethattheprogrammanagerpossessesanappropriatebackgroundregardingbusiness,general
management,andengineeringexperience;leadershipandpeopleskills;andexperienceworkingonhighly
technicalengineeringprograms.
4.3.3.
Ensurethatthecompetency,technicalknowledgeandotherrelevantdomainknowledgeoftheprogram
managerandtheotherkeymembersoftheprogramteamareonparwiththetechnicalcomplexityofthe
program.
4.3.4.
Ensurethattheprogrammanagerhasclarityovertheimpactoftechnical,requirement,andscopechanges
(forexamplebycleartraceabilityofrequirementsandeffectiveuseofchangemanagementcontrolboards).
4.4.
highlyeffective.
4.4.1.
Programmanagementstaffturnoverandhiringratesmustbekeptlow.
4.4.2.
Investheavilyinskillsandintellectualcapital;engagepeoplewithdeepknowledgeoftheproductand
technology.
4.4.3.
Maximizecolocationopportunitiesforprogrammanagement,systemsengineering,businessleadershipand
otherteamstoenableconstantclosecoordination,andresolveallresponsibility,communication,interface,
anddecisionmakingissuesupfrontearlyintheprogram.
4.5.
4.5.1.
Ifdecisionsarebasedonassumptionsthatarelikelytochange,keeptrackofthoseassumptionsandadjust
thedecisionswhentheychange.
4.5.2.
Defineinformationneedsaswellasthetimeframefordecisionmaking.Adjusttheneededinformationand
analysistoreflecttheallottedtimeforreachingadecision.
4.5.3.
Takethetimenecessarytoreachgooddecisions.Alwaysexploreanumberofalternatives.
4.5.4.
Neverdelayadecisionbecauseyouarenotwillingtotaketheresponsibilityorareafraidtodiscussthe
underlyingissues.
4.5.5.
Breakdowncomplexdecisionsintoindependentcomponentsasmuchaspossible.Donotbargainforpower
orstatus,butresolveeachbasedonprogramandsystemrequirementsandconstraints.
4.5.6.
Ifyoucannotmakeadecisionforwhateverreason,keeptrackofitandperiodicallyreviewunmade
decisions.
4.5.7.
Defineaclear,streamlinedprocessforcriticaldecisionmaking,resolvingconflictsofinterest,andconverging
onconsensus.
4.5.8.
Problemsarecorrectedbythosewhocreatedthem,wheretheyoccur,andassoonaspossible.
4.5.9.
Makedecisionscarefullybyconsensus,maintainingclearresponsibilityandthoroughlyconsideringall
options.Searchforsolutionstoissuesthatsatisfymultiplestakeholderssimultaneously.Stakeholder
interestsmustconvergeovertime.
4.5.10.
Proactivelymanagetradeoffsandresolveconflictsofinterestamongstakeholders.Donotignoreortryto
glossthemover.
4.5.11.
Ensurethatsystemdesign,organizationaldesign,contractdesign,riskmanagement,decisionmakingamong
thestakeholders,metrics,andincentivestructurearealignedtosupportthisongoinganddynamicdecision
makingprocess.
4.6.
IntegrateallProgramElementsandFunctionsthroughProgramGovernance
137
Page
4.6.1.
Ensureprogramgovernancehasfullview,controlandinfluenceovertheentireprogramtoeffectivelyguide
andbalancetheprogramanditsindividualcomponentsthroughoutitslifecycle.
4.6.2.
Employprogramsupportingprocessestointegrateprogramcomponentsforeffectivedeliveryofthe
programsbenefitsandoutcomes(e.g.,programrisk,communication,andresourcemanagement)
4.6.3.
Seekandmaintainindependentreviewsoftheprogram.Assignteamsoutsideoftheprogramtoobserveand
assesstheexecutionandhealthoftheprogram.Engagenonadvocatesinreviewprocess.
4.6.4.
Useagatedprocessforvalidating,planning,andexecutionoftheprogramandleveragefunctionalexpertise
atthesegates.
4.6.5.
Ensureintegrationbetweendifferenttopicaldomainsthroughouttheprogramlifecycle,forexample,
architecture,software,andhardwaredesign.
4.6.6.
Alignincentivesacrosstheprogramenterprise.
4.7.
4.7.1.
Captureandabsorblessonslearnedfromalmostallprograms.
4.7.2.
Maximizecoordinationofeffortandflow.
4.7.3.
Maintaincounterpartswithactiveworkingrelationshipsthroughouttheenterprisetofacilitateefficient
communicationandcoordinationamongdifferentpartsoftheenterpriseandwithsuppliers.
4.7.4.
Usefrequent,timely,open,andhonestcommunication.
4.7.5.
Promoteflatorganizationtosimplifyandspeedupcommunication.
4.7.6.
Promotedirect,informal,andfacetofacecommunication.
4.8.
Standardizekeyprogramandprojectelementsthroughouttheprogramtoincreaseefficiencyand
facilitatecollaboration.
4.8.1.
Standardizetheprogrammanagementmetricsandreportingsystem.
4.8.2.
Identifyrepeatableprogrammanagementactivitiesandstandardizethem.
4.8.3.
Promotedesignstandardizationwithengineeringchecklists,standardarchitecture,modularization,busses,
andplatforms.
4.8.4.
Promoteprocessstandardizationindevelopment,management,andmanufacturing.
4.8.5.
Promotestandardizedskillsetswithcarefultrainingandmentoring,rotations,strategicassignments,and
assessmentsofcompetencies.
4.9.
4.9.1.
Useformalfrequentcomprehensiveintegrativeeventsinadditiontoprogrammaticreviews:(a.)Question
everythingwithmultiplewhys;(b.)Alignprocessflowtodecisionflow;(c.)Resolveallissuesastheyoccur
infrequentintegrativeevents;and(d.)Discusstradeoffsandoptions.
4.9.2.
Bewillingtochallengethecustomer'sassumptionsontechnicalandmeritocraticgroundsandtomaximize
programstability,relyingontechnicalexpertise.
4.9.3.
Minimizehandoffstoavoidrework.
4.9.4.
Optimizehumanresourceswhenallocatingvalueadded(VA)andrequired,nonvalueadded(RNVA)tasks:.
(a.)Useprofessionalstodovalueaddingprofessionalwork;(b.)Whenprofessionalsarenotabsolutely
required,usenonprofessionals(supportstaff)todorequired,nonvalueaddedtasks.
4.9.5.
Ensuretheuseofconsistentmeasurementstandardsacrossallprojectsanddatabasecommonality.
4.9.6.
UseLeantoolstopromotetheflowofinformationandminimizehandoffs.Implementsmallbatchsizesof
information,lowinformationininventory,lownumberofconcurrenttasksperemployee,smalltasktimes,
widecommunicationbandwidth,standardization,workcells,andtraining.
4.9.7.
UseminimumnumberofITtoolsandmakecommonwhereverpossible.
4.9.8.
Minimizethenumberofthesoftwarerevisionupdates(e.g.,noncriticalupdates)ofITtoolsandcentrally
controltheupdatereleasestopreventinformationchurning.
4.9.9.
AdapttheITtoolstofitthepeopleandprocess.
4.9.10.
AvoidexcessivelycomplexandoverlyfeaturerichITtools.Tailortoolstoprogramneeds,nottheotherway
around.
138
Page
4.10.
4.10.1.
Makeworkprogressvisibleandeasytounderstandtoall,includingexternalcustomer.
4.10.2.
Tracktheprogram'soverallprogresstodelivertheprogrambenefits.
4.10.3.
Utilizevisualcontrolsinpublicspacesforbestvisibility(avoidcomputerscreens).
4.10.4.
Developasystemthatmakesimperfectionsanddelaysvisibletoall.
4.10.5.
Usetrafficlightsystem(green,yellow,red)toreporttaskstatusvisually(good,warning,critical)andmake
certainproblemsarenotconcealed.
4.10.6.
Provideguidancetotheorganizationandsubprojectstoassesstheirlevelofperformanceandcontribution
totheoverallprogramsuccess.
4.10.7.
Alignprogrammetricswithintendedbenefitsandstakeholderexpectations.
4.10.8.
Establishclearlineofsightbetweenlowerlevelprogramandprojectmetricsandtoplevelprogramsuccess
metrics.
4.10.9.
Developasnapshot/summaryrepresentationofthemeaningfulmetrics(e.g.,standarddeck)tomeasureall
phasesoftheprojectandprogramandmakeitavailabletoall.
4.10.10.
TrackreductionofriskanduncertaintythroughoutprogramlifecycleasKPI.
4.10.11.
TracktheefficiencyandqualityoforganizationalinterfaceswithintheprogramenterprisewithKPIs.
5.
81
5.1.
5.1.1.
Letinformationneedspullthenecessaryworkactivities.
5.1.2.
Promotethecultureinwhichpeoplepullknowledgeastheyneeditandlimitthesupplyofinformationto
genuineusersonly.
5.1.3.
Traintheteamtorecognizewhotheinternalcustomer(Receiver)isforeverytaskaswellasthesupplier
(Giver)toeachtaskuseaSIPOC(supplier,inputs,process,outputs,customer)modeltobetterunderstand
thevaluestream.
5.1.4.
Stayconnectedtothecustomerduringthetaskexecution.
5.1.5.
Promoteeffective,realtimedirectcommunicationbetweeneachgiverandreceiverinthevalueflow,based
onmutualtrustandrespect,andensurebothunderstandtheirmutualneedsandexpectations.
5.1.6.
Fornonroutinetasks,avoidreworkbycoordinatingtaskrequirementswithinternalcustomers.
5.1.7.
Whenpullingwork,usecustomerstakeholdervaluetoseparatevalueaddedfromwaste.
5.2.
5.2.1.
Establishcommoncontractstructuresthroughouttheprogram.
5.2.2.
Aligncontractsandincentivesthroughouttheprogramtofairlysharetheriskandopportunitiesinherentin
theprobabilisticestimates.Usethistoavoidgamingofforecastsandcreatewinwinsituations.
5.2.3.
Ensurethatcontractssupportcompleteandopencommunicationbetweentheprogramstakeholders.
6.
84
6.1.
6.1.1.
Useexistingprogrammanagementstandards,guidelines,andapplicableorganizationalmaturitymodelsto
yourprogramsbestadvantage.
6.1.2.
Focusonachievingtheprogrambenefitswhenselecting,customizing,andimplementingprogram
managementstandards,guidelines,andmaturitymodels.
6.1.3.
Integrateimplementationprocesswithexistingprogramandbusinessstrategytoanoverallprogram
managementandorganizationalmaturitystandard.
6.1.4.
Donotimplementanystandardpurelyforachievinganysortofmandatedprogramcertification.
6.1.5.
ReviewanduseexistingLeanbasedenterpriseandprogramselfassessmenttoolstoquicklyidentify
weaknessesorgoalsandtrackprogressontheprocessimprovementjourney.
139
Page
6.2.
6.2.1.
Developanintegrated,longtermapproachtoimplementLeanThinkingpracticesinproductportfolio
planningandtheentireenterprise.
6.2.2.
SetupacentralizedLeanmanagementfunctionthatdevelopsageneralLeanmanagementprocess
frameworkfortheenterprise,acentralrepositoryofLeanmanagementmethodsandaLeanbusinesscase
thattiesLeanpracticestoachievingtheprogrambenefits.
6.2.3.
SetupaLeanmanagementtraininginfrastructure:midlevelandprojectmanagersmusttrainandmotivate
theirteams.
6.2.4.
CreateincentiveswithintheprogramandsubprojectsthatfostertheacceptanceofLeanpractices.
6.2.5.
IntegratetheLeanactivitiesinprogrammanagementintoanoverallchangemanagementandprocess
improvementapproachinordertoassuresustainabilityoftheimprovements,aswellasusesynergieswith
existingprocessimprovementactivities.
6.2.6.
Startsmallbyselectingthemostbeneficialleanenablersfortheprogram.
6.2.7.
Codifylessonslearnedandevaluatetheireffectiveness.
6.2.8.
Lookfornewandinnovativewaystoworkthataddvalue.
6.3.
6.3.1.
Implementthebasicsofquality.Donotcreate,passon,oracceptdefects.
6.3.2.
Followbasicproblemsolvingtechniques(e.g.,plandocheckact)andadoptacultureofstoppingand
permanentlyfixingproblemswhentheyoccur.
6.3.3.
Promoteexcellenceunder"normal"circumstancesandrewardproactivemanagementofrisks,insteadof
rewarding"hero"behaviorincrisissituations.
6.3.4.
Useandcommunicatefailuresasopportunitiesforlearning,emphasizingprocessandnotpeopleproblems.
6.3.5.
Treatanyimperfectionasanopportunityforimmediateimprovementandlessontobelearned,andpractice
frequentreviewsoflessonslearned.
6.3.6.
Maintainaconsistent,disciplinedapproachtoprogrammanagementandsystemsengineering,including
agreementongoals,outcomes,processes,andcommunicationandstandardizingbestpractice.
6.3.7.
Promotetheideathattheprogramshouldincorporatecontinuousimprovementintheorganizational
culture.
6.3.8.
Pursuerefinementandexcellenceonlyifitcreatesadditionalvalueandbenefits.Avoidoverproductionand
overprocessingofwaste.Ensurethattheprocesscanbeexecuted"rightthefirsttime"fromthenon.
6.3.9.
Useabalancedmatrix/projectorganizationalapproach.Avoidextremes,suchasisolatedfunctional
organizationsandseparatedallpowerfulprojectorganization.
6.4.
6.4.1.
Createmechanismstocapture,communicate,andapplyexperience.
6.4.2.
Clearlydocumentcontextof"bestpractices"and"keylearnings"inlessonslearnedtoallowevaluationof
appropriatenessinnewprograms.
6.4.3.
Createaprocesstoregularlyreview,evaluate,andstandardizelessonslearnedandpreparethemfor
implementation.
6.4.4.
Assignresponsibilityandaccountabilityforreviewing,evaluating,andstandardizinglessonslearnedand
implementresultingchange.
6.4.5.
Insistonstandardizedrootcauseidentificationandprocessforimplementingcorrectiveactionandrelated
training.
6.4.6.
Identifybestpracticesthroughbenchmarkingandprofessionalliterature.
6.4.7.
Sharemetricsofperformanceofexternalpartnersbacktothemandcollaboratewiththemon
improvementsonbothsides.
6.5.
Usechangemanagementeffectivelytocontinuallyandproactivelyaligntheprogramwithunexpected
changesintheprogramsconductandtheenvironment.
140
Page
6.5.1.
Proactivelyaligntheprogramwithchangesintheenvironmenttokeepfocusedonachievingprogram
benefits:Redirect,replanorstopindividualprogramcomponents.
6.5.2.
Establishaprogramchangemanagementprocessatthetoplevelthatincorporatesallrelevantstakeholders
andprogramcomponents.
6.6.
6.6.1.
Focusprogramriskmanagementoncreatingandprotectingvaluefortheprogram.
6.6.2.
Createtransparencyregardingtheuncertaintiesaffectingtheprogram.Understandanddocumentthekey
riskfactorsforprogramsandexistingbestpracticestomanagethem.
6.6.3.
Supportallcriticaldecisionsintheprogramwithriskmanagementresults.
6.6.4.
Reduceprograminternaluncertaintiesandotheruncertaintiesthatcanbeinfluencedtoamaximumdegree.
6.6.5.
Maketheprogramresilientagainstexternaluncertaintiesorotheruncertaintiesthatcannotbeinfluenced.
6.6.6.
Developsufficientriskmanagementskillsintheprogramandprovideadequateresources.
6.6.7.
Tailortheriskmanagementprocesstothespecificprogramneedsandintegrateitwiththeoverallprogram
managementprocess.
6.6.8.
Ensurethatriskmanagementactivitiescontributetocontinuousimprovementofprogrammanagement
processesandtheorganizationoftheprogramenterprise.
6.6.9.
Regularlymonitorandreviewrisks,riskmitigationactions,andtheriskmanagementsystem.
6.6.10.
Paycloseattentiontotheopportunitiesandcapturethemalongwithrisks.
6.7.
6.7.1.
Developageneralprogrampolicy/guideline/frameworkthatoutlinesexpectationsregardingcommunication,
coordination,andcollaboration.
6.7.2.
Useconciseonepageelectronicforms(e.g.,Toyota'sA3form)forstandardizedandefficient
communication,ratherthanverboseunstructuredmemos.Keepunderlyingdataasbackupincaseitis
requestedbythereceiver.
6.7.3.
Similarly,useconciseonepageelectronicformsforefficient,realtimereportingofcrossfunctionaland
crossorganizationalissues,forpromptresolution.
6.7.4.
Developaplanthatimplementsthepolicyandensuresaccountabilitywithintheentireprogramteamin
communications,coordination,anddecisionmakingmethodsattheprogrambeginning.
6.7.5.
Matchthecommunicationcompetenceofpeoplewiththeirroleswhenstaffingtheprogram.
6.7.6.
Publishinstructionsforemaildistributions,instantmessaging,andelectroniccommunications.
6.7.7.
Publishinstructionsforartifactcontentanddatastorage,centralcaptureversuslocalstorage,andforpaper
versuselectronic,balancingbetweenexcessivebureaucracyandtheneedfortraceability.
6.7.8.
Publishadirectoryandorganizationalchartoftheentireprogramteamandprovidetrainingtonewhireson
howtolocatetheneedednodesofknowledge.
6.7.9.
Ensuretimelyandefficientaccesstocentralizeddata.
6.7.10.
Developaneffectivebodyofknowledgethatiseasilyaccessible,historical,searchable,andsharedbyteam
andaknowledgemanagementstrategytoenablethesharingofdataandinformationwithintheenterprise.
6.8.
stakeholders.
6.8.1.
Utilizeandrewardbottomupsuggestionsforsolvingemployeelevelproblems.
6.8.2.
Usequickresponsesmallteamscomprisedofprogramstakeholdersforlocalproblemsanddevelopmentof
standards.
6.8.3.
Useformal,largeimprovementprojectteamstoaddressprogramwideissues.
6.8.4.
Defineaprocessthatimplementssuccessfullocalimprovementsinotherrelevantpartsoftheprogram.
141
A.5
MappingofLeanEnablers
Allofthefollowingmappings(otherthanthemappingtoLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering)canalsobe
foundinSection5inthesummarytablesnexttoeachLeanEnabler.Thefollowingmappingandtablesare
providedtoallowcrossreferencingaswellasidentifyingparticularforspecificchallenges,performance
domains,systemsengineeringprocesses,aswellasprovidetoprovidethemappingtotheLeanEnablersfor
SystemsEngineering.
A.5.1 MappingtoProgramManagementChallenges
TableA3containstheLeanEnablers,sortedbyprogrammanagementchallenges.AsdiscussedinSection4,all
programmanagementchallengesarerelatedtoeachother.SoifweconsideredindirectinfluenceoftheLean
Enablersonthechallengesusing1or2causeandeffecthops,allEnablerswouldaffectallchallenges.Inthis
table,weonlymapthestrongestinfluences.WestronglysuggestconsultingthecompletelistofLeanEnablers
toidentifythemosteffectiveimprovementopportunityforanyprogrammanagementchallenge.
TheprogrammanagementchallengesthataredirectlyaddressedbythemostLeanEnablersareChallenge1
(firefightingandreactiveprogramexecution),Challenge3(Insufficientalignmentoftheprogramenterprise),
Challenge4(Insufficientprocessintegration)andChallenge6(Mismanagementofprogramculture,team
competency,andknowledge).(SeeTablesA3A12.)
TableA3:LeanEnablersDirectlyAddressingFirefightingandReactiveProgramExecution
LE #
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 1: Reactive Program Execution (Firefighting)
1.1.
Buildaprogramculturebasedonrespectforpeople
1.1.1.
Understandthatprogramsfailorsucceedprimarilybasedonpeople,notprocess.Treatpeopleasthemostvalued
assets,notascommodities.
1.1.2.
Investinpeopleselectionanddevelopmenttoaddressenterpriseandprogramexcellence.Ensurethathiring
processmatchestherealneedsoftheprogramfortalentandskill.
1.1.3.
Programleadershipmustbeamentorandprovideamodelfordesiredbehaviorintheentireprogramteam,suchas
trust,respect,honesty,empowerment,teamwork,stability,motivation,anddriveforexcellence.
1.1.4.
Hirepeoplebasedonpassionand"sparkintheeye"andbroadprofessionalknowledge,notonlybasedonvery
specificskillneeds(hirefortalent,trainforskills).Donotdelegatethiscriticaltasktocomputersscanningfor
keywords.
1.1.5.
Rewardbaseduponteamperformanceandincludeteamingabilityamongthecriteriaforhiringandpromotion.
Encourageteambuildingandteamwork.
1.1.6.
Practice"walkaroundmanagement."Donotmanagefromthecubicle;gototheworkandseeforyourself.
1.1.7.
1.1.8.
Promoteclosecollaborationandrelationshipbetweeninternalcustomersandsuppliers.Donotallow"lonewolf
behavior."
1.1.9.
1.1.10.
Whenresolvingissues,attacktheproblemnotthepeople.
1.2.
Motivatebymakingthehigherpurposeoftheprogramandprogramelementstransparent
1.2.1.
Createasharedvisionwhichdrawsoutandinspiresthebestinpeople
1.2.2.
Ensureeveryonecanseehowtheirowncontributionscontributetothesuccessoftheprogramvision
1.3.
Supportanautonomousworkingstyle
1.3.1.
Useandcommunicateflowdownofresponsibility,authority,andaccountability(RAA)tomakedecisionsatlowest
appropriatelevel.
1.3.2.
142
LE #
1.3.3.
Allowcertainamountof"failure"inacontrolledenvironmentatlowerlevels,sopeoplecantakeriskandgrowby
experience.
1.3.4.
Withinprogrampolicyandwithintheirareaofwork,empowerpeopletoacceptresponsibilityandtakeaction.
Promotethemottoratheraskforforgivenessthanpermission.
1.3.5.
continuousimprovement,humancreativity,andentrepreneurship.
1.4.
1.4.1.
1.4.2.
1.4.3.
1.4.4.
1.4.5.
1.4.6.
Establishahighlyexperiencedcoregroup("grayhairs")thatleadsbyexampleandinstitutionalizespositivebehavior.
1.4.7.
Perpetuateprofessionalexcellencethroughmentoring,friendlypeerreview,training,continuingeducation,and
othermeans.
1.5.
1.5.1.
1.5.2.
1.5.3.
Valuepeoplefortheunconventionalideastheycontributetotheprogramwithmutualrespectandappreciation.
1.5.4.
1.5.5.
1.6.
1.6.1.
Preferphysicalteamcolocationtothevirtualcolocation.
1.6.2.
Forvirtuallycolocatedteams,investtimeandmoneyupfronttobuildpersonalrelationshipinfacetofacesettings.
1.6.3.
1.6.4.
1.6.5.
1.6.6.
programenvironment.
1.6.7.
1.6.8.
Programmanagermusthaverespectandpersonalrelationshipwithallfourmainstakeholdergroups:customers,
superiors,programemployees,andkeycontractors/suppliers.
2.3.1.
Everyoneinvolvedintheprogrammusthaveacustomerfirstspirit,focusingontheclearlydefinedprogramvalue
andrequirements.
3.5.3.
Establishasystemandprocessthatallowscomprehensive,effective,andefficientupfrontplanningofprogram
beforeexecutionbegins.
3.5.7.
Ascertainwhatisavailabletotheprogram(resources,talent,budget,andtimeline)andwhatisnotavailableprior
tomakingcommitmenttothecustomersandotherstakeholders.
3.7.3.
3.7.5.
Streamlinesupplychainprocessesandfocusonjustintimeoperationsthatminimizeinventorycarryingcosts.
3.7.10.
3.7.11.
3.7.12.
Trustengineerstocommunicatewithsuppliers'engineersdirectlyforefficientclarification,withinaframeworkof
rules,butwatchforhighriskitemswhichmustbehandledatthetoplevel.
4.4.
Thetoplevelprogrammanagement(e.g.,programmanagementoffice)overseeingtheprogrammustbehighly
effective.
143
LE #
4.5.10.
Proactivelymanagetradeoffsandresolveconflictsofinterestamongstakeholders.Donotignoreortrytogloss
themover.
6.1.
6.1.1.
Useexistingprogrammanagementstandards,guidelines,andapplicableorganizationalmaturitymodelstothe
programsbestadvantage.
6.1.2.
Focusonachievingtheprogrambenefitswhenselecting,customizing,andimplementingprogrammanagement
standards,guidelines,andmaturitymodels.
6.1.3.
Integrateimplementationprocesswithexistingprogramandbusinessstrategytoanoverallprogrammanagement
andorganizationalmaturitystandard.
6.1.4.
6.1.5.
ReviewanduseexistingLeanbasedenterpriseandprogramselfassessmenttoolstoquicklyidentifyweaknesses,
identifygoals,andtrackprogressontheprocessimprovementjourney.
6.2.
6.2.1.
Developanintegrated,longtermapproachtoimplementLeanmanagementpracticesinproductportfolioplanning
andtheentireenterprise.
6.2.2.
SetupacentralizedLeanmanagementfunctionthatdevelopsageneralLeanmanagementprocessframeworkfor
theenterprise,acentralrepositoryofLeanmanagementmethods,andaLeanbusinesscasethattiesLeanpractices
6.2.3.
SetupaLeanmanagementtraininginfrastructure:midlevelandprojectmanagersmusttrainandmotivatetheir
teams.
6.2.4.
6.2.5.
IntegratetheLeanactivitiesinprogrammanagementintoyouroverallchangemanagementandprocess
improvementapproachinordertoassuresustainabilityoftheimprovements,aswellasusesynergieswithexisting
processimprovementactivities.
6.2.6.
StartsmallbyselectingthemostbeneficialLeanenablersforyourprogram.
6.2.7.
6.2.8.
6.3.
6.3.1.
6.3.2.
Followbasicproblemsolvingtechniques(e.g.,plandocheckact)andadoptacultureofstoppingandpermanently
fixingproblemswhentheyoccur.
6.3.3.
Promoteexcellenceunder"normal"circumstancesandrewardproactivemanagementofrisks,insteadofrewarding
"hero"behaviorincrisissituations.
6.3.4.
Useandcommunicatefailuresasopportunitiesforlearningemphasizingprocessandnotpeopleproblems.
6.3.6.
Maintainaconsistent,disciplinedapproachtoprogrammanagementandsystemsengineering,includingagreement
ongoals,outcomes,processes,andcommunicationandstandardizingbestpractice.
6.3.7.
Promotetheideathattheprogramshouldincorporatecontinuousimprovementintheorganizationalculture.
6.3.8.
6.3.9.
Useabalancedmatrix/projectorganizationalapproach.Avoidextremes,suchasisolatedfunctionalorganizations
andseparatedallpowerfulprojectorganization.
6.4.
6.4.1.
6.4.2.
6.4.3.
implementation.
144
LE #
6.4.4.
Assignresponsibilityandaccountabilityforreviewing,evaluating,andstandardizinglessonslearnedandimplement
theresultingchange.
6.4.5.
Insistonstandardizedrootcauseidentificationandprocessforimplementingcorrectiveactionandrelatedtraining.
6.4.6.
6.4.7.
Sharemetricsofperformanceofexternalpartnersbacktothemandcollaboratewiththemonimprovementson
bothsides.
6.5.
Usechangemanagementeffectivelytocontinuallyandproactivelyaligntheprogramwithunexpectedchangesin
theprogramsconductandtheenvironment.
6.5.1.
Proactivelyaligntheprogramwithchangesintheenvironmenttokeepfocusedonachievingprogrambenefits;
redirect,replan,orstopindividualprogramcomponents.
6.5.2.
Establishaprogramchangemanagementprocessatthetoplevelthatincorporatesallrelevantstakeholdersand
programcomponents.
6.6.
6.6.1.
6.6.2.
Createtransparencyregardingtheuncertaintiesaffectingtheprogram.Understandanddocumentthekeyrisk
factorsforprogramsandexistingbestpracticestomanagethem.
6.6.3.
6.6.4.
6.6.5.
6.6.6.
6.6.7.
managementprocess.
6.6.8.
Ensurethatriskmanagementactivitiescontributetocontinuousimprovementofprogrammanagementprocesses
andtheorganizationoftheprogramenterprise.
6.6.9.
6.6.10.
6.7.
6.7.1.
6.7.2.
Useconciseonepageelectronicforms(e.g.,Toyota'sA3form)forstandardizedandefficientcommunication,rather
thanverbose,unstructuredmemos.Keepunderlyingdataasbackupincaseitisrequestedbythereceiver.
6.7.3.
Similarly,useconciseonepageelectronicformsforefficient,realtimereportingofcrossfunctionalandcross
organizationalissues,forpromptresolution.
6.7.4.
6.7.5.
6.7.6.
6.7.7.
Publishinstructionsforartifactcontentanddatastorage,centralcaptureversuslocalstorage,andforpaperversus
electronic,balancingbetweenexcessivebureaucracyandtheneedfortraceability.
6.7.8.
Publishadirectoryandorganizationalchartoftheentireprogramteamandprovidetrainingtonewhiresonhowto
locatetheneedednodesofknowledge.
6.7.9.
6.7.10.
Developaneffectivebodyofknowledgethatiseasilyaccessible,historical,searchable,andsharedbyteamanda
knowledgemanagementstrategytoenablethesharingofdataandinformationwithintheenterprise.
6.8.
stakeholders.
6.8.1.
145
LE #
6.8.2.
standards.
6.8.3.
6.8.4.
TableA4:LeanEnablersDirectlyAddressingUnstable,UnclearandIncompleteRequirements
LE #
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 2: Unclear Requirements
2.1.
2.1.1.
Definevalueastheoutcomeofanactivitythatsatisfiesatleastthreeconditions:(a.)Theexternalcustomer
stakeholdersarewillingtopayforvalue;(b.)Transformsinformationormaterialorreducesuncertainty;And(c).
Providesspecifiedprogrambenefitsrightthefirsttime.
2.1.2.
2.1.3.
Developarobustprocesstocapture,develop,anddisseminatecustomerstakeholdervaluewithextremeclarity.
2.1.4.
2.1.5.
2.2.
2.2.1.
Allprogramactivities,includingcommunicationsandmetrics,mustbefocusedontheintendedoutcomesofthe
programtheprogramsplannedbenefits.
2.2.3.
2.3.
2.3.1.
andrequirements.
2.3.2.
2.3.3.
Pursueaprogramvisionandarchitecturethatcapturescustomerstakeholderrequirementsclearlyandcanbe
adaptivetochanges.
2.3.4.
Establishaplanthatdelineatestheartifactsandinteractionsthatprovidethebestmeansfordrawingoutcustomer
stakeholderrequirements.
2.3.5.
2.3.6.
Createsharedunderstandingofprogramcontent,goals,status,andchallengesamongkeystakeholders.
2.3.7.
2.3.8.
Buildtrustandhealthyrelationshipswithstakeholdersbyestablishingopencommunicationandearlyengagement
withtheprogramplanningandexecution.
2.3.9.
2.3.10.
2.3.11.
Useprogramcomponentselectionandreviewwiththekeystakeholdersasanopportunitytocontinuouslyfocus
theprogramonbenefitsdelivery.
2.4.
Develophighqualityprogramrequirementsamongcustomerstakeholdersbeforethebiddingandexecution
processbegins.
2.4.1.
representativeoftheneed,stable,complete,crystalclear,deconflicted,freeofwastefulspecifications,andas
simpleaspossible.
2.4.2.
Useonlyhighlyexperiencedpeopleandexpertinstitutionstowriteprogramrequirements,RFPs,andcontracts.
146
LE #
2.4.3.
Ifthecustomerlackstheexpertisetodevelopclearrequirements,issueacontracttoaproxyorganizationwith
toweringexperienceandexpertisetosortoutandmaturetherequirementsandspecificationsintheRFP.This
proxymustremainaccountableforthequalityoftherequirements,includingpersonalaccountability.
2.4.4.
Preventcarelessinsertionofmutuallycompetingandconflictingrequirements,excessivenumberofrequirements,
standards,andrulestobefollowedintheprogram,mindless"cutandpaste"ofrequirementsfromprevious
programs.
2.4.5.
Minimizethetotalnumberofrequirements.Includeonlythosethatareneededtocreatevaluetothecustomer
stakeholders.
2.4.6.
Insistthatasinglepersonisinchargeoftheentireprogramrequirementstoassureconsistencyandefficiency
throughout.
2.4.7.
demonstrated.
2.4.8.
Alwaysclearlylinkrequirementstospecificcustomerstakeholderneedsandtracerequirementsfromthistoplevel
tobottomlevel.
2.4.9.
2.4.10.
Requireanindependentmandatoryreviewoftheprogramrequirements,conceptofoperation,andotherrelevant
specificationsofvalueforclarity,lackofambiguity,lackofconflicts,stability,completeness,andgeneralreadiness
forcontractingandeffectiveprogramexecution.
2.4.11.
Clearlyarticulatethetoplevelobjectives,value,programbenefits,andfunctionalrequirementsbeforeformal
requirementsorarequestforproposalisissued.
2.4.12.
Useacleardecisiongatethatreviewsthematurityofrequirements,thetradeoffsbetweentoplevelobjectives,
andthelevelofremainingrequirementsrisksbeforedetailedformalrequirementsorarequestforproposalis
issued.
2.5.
2.5.1.
Developanagileprocesstoanticipate,accommodate,andcommunicatechangingcustomerrequirements.
2.5.2.
understandingandagreement.Keeptherecordsinwriting,sharethediscusseditems,anddonotallow
requirementscreep.
2.5.3.
Usearchitecturalmethodsandmodelingtocreateastandardprogramsystemrepresentation(3DintegratedCAE
toolset,mockups,prototypes,models,simulations,andsoftwaredesigntools)thatallowinteractionswith
customersandotherstakeholdersasthebestmeansofdrawingoutrequirements.
2.5.4.
2.5.5.
Toalignstakeholders,identifyasmallnumberofprimarygoalsandobjectivesthatrepresenttheprogrammission,
howitwillachieveitsbenefits,andwhatthesuccesscriteriawillbetoalignstakeholders.Repeatthesegoalsand
2.5.6.
2.5.7.
Facilitatecommunicationbetweendifferentandpossiblydivergingstakeholderstodevelopasharedunderstanding
oftheprogramamongthestakeholders,clearlyidentifyingandincorporatingthevariousinterestsofdifferent
stakeholders(aligned,indifferent,oropposed),andestablishtrust.
2.5.8.
Createeffectivechannelsforclarificationofrequirements(e.g.,involvingcustomerstakeholdersinprogramteams).
2.5.9.
Failearlyandfailoftenthroughrapidlearningtechniques(e.g.,prototyping,tests,simulations,digitalmodelsor
spiraldevelopment).
2.5.10.
Employagilemethodstomanagenecessaryrequirementschangeandmaketheprogramdeliverablesrobust
againstthosechanges.Makebothprogramprocessesandprogramdeliverablesreusable,reconfigurable,and
scalable.
3.5.14.
Theprogrammanagermustpersonallyunderstand,clarify,andremoveambiguity,conflicts,andwastefromkey
requirementsandexpectationsattheprogramstart.
3.7.6.
Whendefiningrequirementsetsformultiplesuppliers,ensurethattheyareindependentofeachother,inorderto
minimizeriskandreducetheneedtomanagedependenciesamongsuppliers.
147
LE #
3.7.7.
Communicatetosupplierswithcrystalclarityallexpectations,includingthecontextandneed,andallprocedures
andexpectationsforacceptancetests,andensuretherequirementsarestable.
3.10.8.
Matchtechnologiestoprogramrequirements.Donotexceedprogramneedsbyusingunnecessarilyexquisite
technologies("goldplating").
3.10.9.
4.9.2.
Bewillingtochallengethecustomer'sassumptionsontechnicalandmeritocraticgrounds,andtomaximizeprogram
stability,relyingontechnicalexpertise.
4.10.7.
5.1.6.
Fornonroutinetasks,avoidreworkbycoordinatingtaskrequirementswithinternalcustomer.
6.1.
TableA5:LeanEnablersDirectlyAddressingInsufficientAlignmentandCoordinationoftheExtendedEnterprise
LE #
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 3: Insufficient Enterprise Alignment
1.1.6.
Practice"walkaroundmanagement."Donotmanagefromthecubicle;gototheworkandseeforyourself.
1.1.8.
behavior."
1.2.
1.2.1.
1.2.2.
1.6.4.
1.6.5.
2.1.
2.1.4.
2.1.5.
2.2.
2.2.1.
2.2.2.
2.2.3.
2.3.
2.3.1.
andrequirements.
2.3.2.
2.3.3.
adaptivetochanges.
2.3.4.
2.3.5.
2.3.6.
2.3.7.
2.3.8.
2.3.9.
148
LE #
2.3.10.
2.3.11.
2.5.5.
2.5.7.
2.6.
Activelyminimizethebureaucratic,regulatory,andcomplianceburdenontheprogramandsubprojects.
2.6.1.
Strivetominimizeandstreamlinetheburdenofpaperworkforexternalstakeholdersbyactivelyengagingthemin
theprocessandclearlyarticulatingandaligningthebenefitgeneratedbyeachreport.
2.6.2.
Minimizeandstreamlinetheprograminternalreportingforprogramactivitiesandsubprojectsbyoptimizingthe
internalreportingrequirements.Onlyrequirereportsthatareclearlynecessaryandalignreportingrequirementsto
2.6.3.
3.1.3.
3.4.
3.4.1.
Ensurestrongcorporate,institutionalandpersonalaccountabilityandpersonalpenaltiesfor"lowballing"ofthe
budget,schedule,andriskandoverestimatingcapabilities(e.g.,thetechnologyreadinesslevels(TRL))inorderto
winthecontract.
3.4.2.
If"lowballing"isdetectedonafixedpricecontract,insistoncontinuingthefixedpricecontract,orterminatethe
programandrebid.Donotallowswitchingtoacostpluscontract.
3.4.3.
3.5.2.
3.5.4.
Theprogramleadershipteam(programmanager,technicalmanagers,leadsystemengineers,etc.)mustidentifykey
stakeholdersthatwillbeinvolvedthroughouttheprogramlifecyclebeforetheprogramexecutionbegins.
3.5.5.
Holdaprogramkickoffmeetingwithkeystakeholdersthatidentifiestheprogrambenefits,thekeymechanismsto
realizethesebenefits(e.g.,valuestreammapping),identifyandassignrolesandresponsibilities,identifykey
dependenciesandrisksinprogram,setkeymilestones,andestablishanactionplan.
3.5.15.
3.7.
3.7.1.
Permitoutsourcingandsubcontractingonlyforprogramelementsthatareperfectlydefinedandstable.Donot
subcontractearlyprogramphaseswhentheneedforclosecoordinationisthestrongest.
3.7.2.
programphases.
3.7.3.
3.7.4.
3.7.7.
3.7.8.
3.7.9.
3.7.10.
3.7.11.
3.7.12.
rules,butwatchforhighriskitemsthatmustbehandledatthetoplevel.
3.10.10.
149
LE #
3.10.11.
Utilizeindependenttechnicalreviewstoconfirmacapabilitytodeliverandintegrateanynewtechnologythatcould
delaytheprogramorcausescheduleoverruns.
3.11.
3.11.1.
3.11.2.
requirements,etc.
4.1.
4.1.1.
Seamlesslyandconcurrentlyengagesystemsengineerswithallengineeringphasesfromthepreproposalphaseto
thefinalprogramdelivery.
4.1.2.
Maintainteamcontinuitybetweenphasestomaximizeexperientiallearning,includingpreproposalandproposal
phases.
4.3.4.
Ensurethattheprogrammanagerhasclarityovertheimpactoftechnical,requirement,andscopechanges(e.g.,by
cleartraceabilityofrequirementsandeffectiveuseofchangemanagementcontrolboards).
4.4.3.
Maximizecolocationopportunitiesforprogrammanagement,systemsengineering,businessleadershipandother
teamstoenableconstantclosecoordination,andresolveallresponsibility,communication,interface,anddecision
makingissuesupfrontearlyintheprogram.
4.5.7.
Defineaclear,streamlinedprocessforcriticaldecisionmaking,resolvingconflictsofinterestandconvergingon
consensus.
4.5.9.
Makedecisionscarefullybyconsensus,maintainingclearresponsibilityandthoroughlyconsideringalloptions.
Searchforsolutionstoissuesthatsatisfymultiplestakeholderssimultaneously.Stakeholderinterestsmustconverge
overtime.
4.5.10.
overthem.
4.5.11.
Ensurethatsystemdesign,organizationaldesign,contractdesign,riskmanagement,decisionmakingamongthe
stakeholders,metrics,andincentivestructurearealignedtosupportthisongoinganddynamicdecisionmaking
process.
4.6.
Integrateallprogramelementsandfunctionsthroughprogramgovernance.
4.6.1.
Ensureprogramgovernancehasfullview,control,andinfluenceovertheentireprogramtoeffectivelyguideand
balancetheprogramanditsindividualcomponentsthroughoutitslifecycle.
4.6.2.
Employprogramsupportingprocessestointegrateprogramcomponentsforeffectivedeliveryoftheprograms
benefitsandoutcomes(e.g.,programrisk,communication,andresourcemanagement).
4.6.3.
Seekandmaintainindependentreviewsoftheprogram.Assignteamsoutsideoftheprogramtoobserveandassess
theexecutionandhealthoftheprogram.Engagenonadvocatesinreviewprocess.
4.6.4.
Useagatedprocessforvalidating,planning,andexecutionoftheprogramandleveragefunctionalexpertiseat
thesegates.
4.6.5.
Ensureintegrationbetweendifferenttopicaldomainsthroughouttheprogramlifecycle,forexample,architecture,
software,andhardwaredesign.
4.6.6.
4.7.4.
4.7.5.
4.7.6.
4.8.
collaboration.
4.8.4.
4.9.7.
4.10.
4.10.1.
4.10.6.
Provideguidancetotheorganizationandsubprojectstoassesstheirlevelofperformanceandcontributiontothe
overallprogramsuccess.
4.10.7.
150
LE #
4.10.11.
5.1.4.
5.1.5.
Promoteeffective,realtimedirectcommunicationbetweeneachgiverandreceiverinthevalueflow,basedon
mutualtrustandrespect,andensurebothunderstandtheirmutualneedsandexpectations.
5.2.
Establisheffectivecontractingvehiclesintheprogramthatsupporttheprograminachievingtheplannedbenefits
andcreateeffectivepullforvalue.
5.2.1.
5.2.2.
Aligncontractsandincentivesthroughouttheprogramtofairlysharetheriskandopportunitiesinherentinthe
probabilisticestimates.Usethistoavoidgamingofforecastsandcreatewinwinsituations.
5.2.3.
6.1.
6.1.1.
6.1.2.
6.1.3.
6.2.1.
6.2.6.
6.3.
6.3.1.
Implementthebasicsofquality.Donotcreate,passonoracceptdefects.
6.3.4.
6.3.5.
6.3.6.
6.3.7.
6.3.8.
6.3.9.
andseparatedallpowerfulprojectorganizations.
6.5.1.
Proactivelyaligntheprogramwithchangesintheenvironmenttokeepfocusedonachievingprogrambenefits:
redirect,replan,orstopindividualprogramcomponents.
6.5.2.
programcomponents.
6.7.
6.7.1.
6.7.4.
6.7.5.
6.7.6.
TableA6:LeanEnablersDirectlyAddressingLocallyOptimizedProcessesthatareNotIntegratedfortheEntireEnterprise
LE #
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 4: Process Integration
1.1.10.
Whenresolvingissues,attacktheproblem,notthepeople.
1.5.
151
LE #
1.5.6.
2.1.3.
3.1.
3.1.1.
3.1.2.
3.1.3.
3.1.4.
Useformalvaluestreammappingmethodstoidentifyandeliminatemanagementandengineeringwaste,andto
tailorandscaletasks.
3.2.
3.2.1.
3.2.2.
Setupasingle,colocatedorganizationtohandletheentiresystemsengineeringandarchitectingfortheentire
effortthroughoutthelifecycle,inordertoincreaseRAA.
3.2.3.
Ensurethatsystemsengineeringandarchitectingareacentralpartofprogrammanagementandnotoutsourcedor
subcontracted,astheseactivitiesrequireahighlevelofcoordination.
3.2.4.
Developaclearvisionandholisticviewofthefuturestateofyourprogramenterprise,includingfutureportfolioof
products,includingboththefutureorganizationaswellasthefuturevaluestream.Provideguidanceonaclearpath
3.2.5.
Useacleararchitecturaldescriptionoftheagreedsolutiontoplanacoherentprogram,engineering,and
3.2.6.
stakeholders.
3.2.7.
Leadandsustainthetransformationtoanintegratedprogrammanagementandsystemsengineeringenterprise
acrosscustomerandsupplierorganizations.
3.2.8.
Insistonadoptinganadaptivearchitecturethatmeetstheoperationalneeds,whilenotcateringtoanyproprietary
technologiesorcapabilitiesofpotentialcontractors.
3.3.
3.3.1.
Plantoutilizecrossfunctionalteamsmadeupofthemostexperiencedandcompatiblepeopleatthestartofthe
projecttolookatabroadrangeofsolutionsets.
3.3.2.
3.3.3.
Forkeydecisions,explorealternativeoptionsinparallelaslongasfeasible.Forexample,usethemethodofSet
BasedConcurrentEngineering.
3.3.4.
3.3.5.
3.3.6.
3.4.
3.4.1.
winthecontract.
3.4.2.
If"lowballing"isdetectedonafixedpricecontract,insistoncontinuingthefixedpricecontract,orterminatethe
program,andrebid.Donotallowswitchingtocostpluscontracts.
3.4.3.
3.5.5.
3.5.10.
Transitionthefrontloadingoftheprogramandkeyprojectsintoacontinuousplanningandimprovementprocess
withregularworkshops.
152
LE #
3.7.4.
3.7.5.
3.7.6.
3.7.7.
3.7.12.
rules,butwatchforhighriskitemswhichmustbehandledatthetoplevel.
4.1.
4.1.1.
4.1.2.
phases.
4.5.
4.5.1.
Ifdecisionsarebasedonassumptionsthatarelikelytochange,keeptrackofthoseassumptionsandadjustthe
decisionswhentheychange.
4.5.2.
Definetheinformationneedsaswellastimeframefordecisionmaking.Adjusttheneededinformationandanalysis
toreflecttheallottedtimeforreachingadecision.
4.5.3.
4.5.4.
Neverdelayadecisionbecauseyouarenotwillingtotaketheresponsibilityorareafraidtodiscusstheunderlying
issues.
4.5.5.
Breakdowncomplexdecisionsintoindependentcomponentsasmuchaspossible.Donotbargainforpoweror
status,butresolveeachbasedonprogramandsystemrequirementsandconstraints.
4.5.6.
Ifyoucannotmakeadecisionforwhateverreason,keeptrackofitandperiodicallyreviewunmadedecisions.
4.5.7.
consensus.
4.5.8.
4.5.9.
overtime.
4.5.11.
process.
4.6.
4.6.1.
Ensureprogramgovernancehasfullview,controlandinfluenceovertheentireprogramtoeffectivelyguideand
4.6.2.
4.6.3.
4.6.4.
Useagatedprocessforvalidating,planning,andexecutionoftheprogram,andleveragefunctionalexpertiseat
thesegates.
4.6.5.
4.6.6.
4.7.
4.7.1.
4.7.2.
153
LE #
4.7.3.
communicationandcoordinationamongdifferentpartsoftheenterprise,andwithsuppliers.
4.7.4.
4.7.5.
4.7.6.
Promotedirect,informalandfacetofacecommunication.
4.8.1.
Standardizeprogrammanagementmetricsandreportingsystem.
4.8.2.
4.8.3.
Promotedesignstandardizationwithengineeringchecklists,standardarchitecture,modularization,busses,and
platforms.
4.8.4.
4.8.5.
4.9.
4.9.1.
everythingwithmultiplewhys(b.)Alignprocessflowtodecisionflow;(c).Resolveallissuesastheyoccurin
frequentintegrativeevents;and(d.)Discusstradeoffsandoptions.
4.9.2.
Bewillingtochallengethecustomer'sassumptionsontechnicalandmeritocraticgrounds,andtomaximizeprogram
4.9.3.
4.9.4.
Optimizehumanresourceswhenallocatingvalueadded(VA)andrequired,nonvalueadded(RNVA)tasks:(a.)Use
professionalstodovalueaddingprofessionalwork;and(b.)Whenprofessionalsarenotabsolutelyrequired,use
nonprofessionals(supportstaff)todorequired,nonvalueaddingtasks.
4.9.5.
4.9.6.
UseLeantoolstopromotetheflowofinformationandminimizehandoffs.Implementsmallbatchssizeof
information,lowinformationininventory,lownumberofconcurrenttasksperemployee,smalltasktimes,wide
4.9.7.
4.9.8.
Minimizethenumberofthesoftwarerevisionupdates(e.g.,noncriticalupdates)ofITtoolsandcentrallycontrolthe
updatereleasestopreventinformationchurning.
4.9.9.
4.9.10.
AvoidexcessivelycomplexandoverlyfeaturerichITtools.Tailortoolstoprogramneeds,nottheotherwayaround.
5.1.
5.1.1.
5.1.2.
Promotethecultureinwhichpeoplepullknowledgeastheyneeditandlimitthesupplyofinformationtogenuine
usersonly.
5.1.3.
Traintheteamtorecognizewhotheinternalcustomer(receiver)isforeverytaskaswellasthesupplier(giver)to
eachtask;useaSIPOC(supplier,inputs,process,outputs,customer)modeltobetterunderstandthevaluestream.
5.1.4.
5.1.5.
5.1.6.
5.1.7.
5.2.
6.1.
6.1.1.
154
LE #
6.1.2.
Focusonachievingtheprogrambenefitswhenselecting,customizingandimplementingprogrammanagement
6.1.3.
6.1.4.
6.1.5.
goals,andtrackprogressontheprocessimprovementjourney.
6.2.
6.2.1.
6.2.2.
6.2.3.
teams.
6.2.4.
6.2.5.
IntegratetheLeanactivitiesinprogrammanagementintotheoverallchangemanagementandprocess
improvementapproachinordertoassuresustainabilityoftheimprovements,andusesynergieswithexisting
6.2.6.
6.3.
6.3.1.
6.3.2.
6.3.3.
6.3.5.
6.3.6.
6.3.7.
6.3.8.
6.4.5.
6.4.6.
6.6.8.
6.7.2.
thanverboseunstructuredmemos.Keepunderlyingdataasbackupincaseitisrequestedbythereceiver.
6.7.3.
6.8.
stakeholders.
6.8.1.
6.8.2.
standards.
6.8.3.
6.8.4.
155
TableA7:LeanEnablersDirectlyAddressingUnclearRoles,Responsibilities,andAccountability
LE #
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 5: Unclear Roles and Responsibility
1.3.1.
Useandcommunicateflowdownofresponsibility,authorityandaccountability(RAA)tomakedecisionsatlowest
appropriatelevel.
3.5.4.
Theprogramleadershipteam(programmanager,technicalmanagers,leadsystemengineersetc.)mustidentifykey
3.5.5.
3.5.9.
Forallcriticalactivities,definewhoisresponsibleforapproving,supporting,andinforming(alsoknownastheRACI
matrix),usingastandardizedtool,payingattentiontoprecedenceoftasks,anddocumentinghandoffs.
3.7.10.
4.2.
Ensureclearresponsibility,accountabilityandauthority(RAA)throughouttheprogramfrominitialrequirements
definitiontofinaldelivery.
4.2.1.
Nominateapermanent,experiencedprogrammanagerfullyresponsibleandaccountableforsuccessoftheentire
programlifecycle,withcompleteauthorityoverallaspectsoftheprogram(businessandtechnical).
4.2.2.
4.2.3.
4.2.4.
Holdpeopleresponsiblefortheircontributionsthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.Upstreamactivitiesmustbeheld
responsibleforissuestheycauseindownstreamactivities.
4.2.5.
Inthetoplevelprogrammanagementteamanddecisionmaking,thedifferentroles(e.g.,businessandtechnical)
mustexhibitahighlevelofteamwork,understanding,andappreciationofthenecessitiesineachother'sdomain.
4.2.6.
Developaprocesstoensurethetimelyandflawlesscoordination,interface,andhandoff(ifneeded)ofRAAamong
relevantprogramstakeholdersandexecutionteamsthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.
4.3.
4.3.1.
Groomanexceptionalprogrammanagerwithadvancedskillstoleadthedevelopment,thepeople,andensure
programsuccess.
4.3.2.
Ensurethattheprogrammanagerpossessesanappropriatebackgroundregarding:business,generalmanagement,
andengineeringexperience;leadershipandpeopleskills;andexperienceworkingonhighlytechnicalengineering
programs.
4.3.3.
Ensurethatthecompetency,technicalknowledge,andotherrelevantdomainknowledgeoftheprogrammanager
andtheotherkeymembersoftheprogramteamareonparwiththetechnicalcomplexityoftheprogram.
4.5.
4.5.5.
4.5.8.
4.7.3.
5.1.3.
eachtaskuseaSIPOC(supplier,inputs,process,outputs,customer)modeltobetterunderstandthevaluestream.
6.1.
6.3.2.
TableA8:LeanEnablersDirectlyAddressingMismanagementofProgramCulture,TeamCompetencyandKnowledge
LE #
1.1.
156
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 6: Culture, Competency & Skills

LE #
1.1.1.
1.1.2.
Investinpeopleselectionanddevelopmenttoaddressenterpriseandprogramexcellence.Ensurethathiring
1.1.3.
Programleadershipmustbeamentorandprovideamodelfordesiredbehaviorintheentireprogramteam,suchas
trust,respect,honesty,empowerment,teamwork,stability,motivation,anddriveforexcellence.
1.1.4.
keywords.
1.1.5.
Rewardbaseduponteamperformance,andincludeteamingabilityamongthecriteriaforhiringandpromotion.
1.1.6.
Practice"walkaroundmanagement."Donotmanagefromcubicle;gototheworkandseeforyourself.
1.1.7.
1.1.8.
behavior."
1.1.9.
1.2.1.
1.2.2.
1.3.
1.3.1.
Useandcommunicateflowdownofresponsibility,authority,andaccountability(RAA)tomakedecisionsatlowest
appropriatelevel.
1.3.2.
Eliminatefearfromtheworkenvironment:promoteconflictresolutionatthelowestlevel.
1.3.3.
experience.
1.3.4.
1.3.5.
1.4.
1.4.1.
1.4.2.
1.4.3.
1.4.4.
1.4.5.
1.4.6.
1.4.7.
othermeans.
1.5.
1.5.1.
1.5.2.
1.5.3.
1.5.4.
1.5.5.
1.5.6.
1.6.
157
LE #
1.6.1.
1.6.2.
1.6.3.
1.6.4.
1.6.6.
programenvironment.
1.6.7.
1.6.8.
Programmanagermusthaverespectandpersonalrelationshipwithallfourmainstakeholdergroups:customers,
superiors,programemployeesandkeycontractors/suppliers.
3.3.1.
3.7.4.
3.7.8.
3.7.10.
3.7.11.
4.1.2.
phases.
4.3.1.
programsuccess.
4.3.2.
Ensurethattheprogrammanagerpossessesanappropriatebackgroundregarding:business,generalmanagement,
andengineeringexperience;leadershipandpeopleskills;andexperienceworkingonhighlytechnicalengineering
programs.
4.3.3.
Ensurethatthecompetency,technicalknowledgeandotherrelevantdomainknowledgeoftheprogrammanager
4.3.4.
Ensurethattheprogrammanagerhasclarityovertheimpactoftechnicalrequirementsandscopechanges(e.g.,by
cleartraceabilityofrequirementsandeffectiveuseofchangemanagementcontrolboards).
4.4.
effective.
4.4.1.
4.4.2.
Investheavilyinskillsandintellectualcapital;engagepeoplewithdeepknowledgeoftheproductandtechnology.
4.7.1.
4.8.3.
platforms.
4.8.5.
4.9.4.
Optimizehumanresourceswhenallocatingvalueadded(VA)andrequired,nonvalueadded(RNVA)tasks:(a.)Use
professionalstodovalueaddingprofessionalwork;and(b.)Whenprofessionalsarenotabsolutelyrequired,use
nonprofessionals(supportstaff)todorequired,nonvalueaddingtasks.
6.1.
6.2.2.
theenterprise,acentralrepositoryofLeanmanagementmethodsandaLeanbusinesscasethattiesLeanpractices
6.2.3.
teams.
6.2.7.
6.2.8.
6.3.4.
158
LE #
6.3.5.
6.4.
6.4.1.
6.4.2.
6.4.3.
Createaprocesstoregularlyreview,evaluateandstandardizelessonslearnedandpreparethemfor
implementation.
6.4.4.
Assignresponsibilityandaccountabilityforreviewing,evaluating,standardizinglessonslearned,andimplement
resultingchange.
6.4.5.
6.4.6.
6.4.7.
bothsides.
6.5.
6.6.
6.6.6.
6.7.
Striveforperfectcommunication,coordinationandcollaborationacrosspeopleandprocesses.
6.7.1.
6.7.2.
6.7.3.
6.7.4.
6.7.5.
Matchthecommunicationcompetenceofpeoplewiththeirroleswhenstaffingtheprogram
6.7.6.
6.7.7.
6.7.8.
Publishadirectoryandorganizationchartoftheentireprogramteamandprovidetrainingtonewhiresonhowto
6.7.9.
6.7.10.
Developaneffectivebodyofknowledgethatiseasilyaccessible,historical,searchable,andsharedbyteamanda
TableA9:LeanEnablersDirectlyAddressingInsufficientProgramPlanning
LE #
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 7: Insufficient Planning
2.2.2.
2.3.4.
3.1.1.
3.5.
3.5.1.
Planearlyforconsistentrobustnessandrightthefirsttimeunder"normal"circumstances,insteadofherobehavior
inlater"crisis"situations.
159
LE #
3.5.2.
3.5.3.
Establishasystemandprocessthatallowscomprehensive,effectiveandefficientupfrontplanningofprogram
3.5.4.
3.5.5.
Holdaprogramkickoffmeetingwithkeystakeholdersthatidentifiestheprogrambenefitsandthekeymechanisms
torealizethesebenefits(e.g.,valuestreammapping),identifyandassignrolesandresponsibilities,identifykey
3.5.6.
Propagatefrontloadingofprogramthroughoutcriticalsubprojectswithsimilarworkshopstothosedescribedin
3.5.5.
3.5.7.
Ascertainwhatisavailabletotheprogram(resources,talent,budget,andtimeline)andwhatnotavailablepriorto
makingcommitmenttothecustomersandotherstakeholders.
3.5.8.
HoldLeanAcceleratedPlanningsessionsattheprogramlevelandforkeysubprojects,engagingallstakeholdersin
developingmasterschedule,valuestreammap,risksandopportunities,keyassumptions,andactionitems.
3.5.9.
Forallcriticalactivities,definewhoisresponsible,approving,supporting,andinforming(alsoknownasRACI
matrix),usingastandardizedtool,payingattentiontoprecedenceoftasksanddocumentinghandoffs.
3.5.10.
3.5.11.
Anticipateandplantoresolveasmanydownstreamissuesandrisksasearlyaspossibletopreventdownstream
problems.
3.5.12.
Includeadetailedriskandopportunityidentification,assessment,andmitigationintheearlyprogramplanning
phases.
3.5.13.
Ensurethattechnicalchallengeswithintheprogramareadequatelyaddressedbymanagementstaffduringthe
planningprocess.
3.5.14.
Programmanagermustpersonallyunderstand,clarifyandremoveambiguity,conflicts,andwastefromkey
3.5.15.
3.6.
3.6.1.
Developprobabilisticestimatesforcost,schedule,andothercriticalplanningforecasts.
3.6.2.
Baseplanningassumptionsonconfidenceintervalsnotonpointestimates.
3.9.
3.9.1.
Createaplantoappropriatelyintegrateandalignprogrammanagement,systemsengineering,andotherhighlevel
planningandcoordinationfunctions.
3.9.2.
3.9.3.
functions.
3.9.4.
Planbelowfullcapacitytoenableflowofworkwithoutaccumulationofvariability,andpermitschedulingflexibility
inworkloading,thatis,haveappropriatecontingenciesandschedulebuffers.
3.9.5.
3.9.6.
Carefullyplanforprecedenceofengineeringandmanagementtasks(whichtasktofeedwhatothertaskswithwhat
dataandwhen),understandingtaskdependencies,andparentchildrelationships.
3.9.7.
Updatedetailedplanningregularlytoreflectnewinformation,beingconsistentwiththelongtermstrategicplan.
Donotforceprogramstoexecuteagainstadetailed,outdatedplanthatwasdevelopedbasedonincomplete
information.
3.11.2.
Plantousevisualmethodswhereverpossibletocommunicateschedules,workloads,andchangestocustomer
requirements,etc.
4.8.
collaboration.
160
LE #
4.8.2.
4.8.3.
platforms.
4.8.4.
6.1.
Makeeffectiveuseofexistingprogrammanagementandorganizationalmaturitystandards
TableA10:LeanEnablersDirectlyAddressingImproperMetrics,MetricSystemsandKPIs
LE #
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 8: Improper Metrics
1.1.5.
1.5.3.
2.2.1.
3.8.
3.8.1.
3.8.2.
3.8.3.
3.8.4.
Usemetricsstructuredtomotivatetherightbehavior.Beverycarefultoavoidtheunintendedconsequencesthat
comefromthewrongmetricsincentivizingundesirablebehavior.
3.8.5.
4.6.6.
4.8.1.
4.9.5.
4.10.
4.10.1.
4.10.2.
4.10.3.
4.10.4.
4.10.5.
Usetrafficlightsystem(green,yellow,red)toreporttaskstatusvisually(good,warning,critical)andmakecertain
problemsarenotconcealed.
4.10.6.
4.10.7.
4.10.8.
metrics.
4.10.9.
Developasnapshot/summaryrepresentationofthemeaningfulmetrics(e.g.,standarddeck)tomeasureallphases
oftheprojectandprogramandmakeitavailabletoall.
4.10.10.
4.10.11.
5.2.2.
6.1.
6.2.4.
6.3.3.
Promoteexcellenceunder"normal"circumstancesandrewardproactivemanagementofrisks,insteadofrewarding
"hero"behaviorincrisissituations.
161
LE #
6.4.7.
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 8: Improper Metrics

bothsides.
TableA11:LeanEnablersDirectlyAddressingLackofProactiveProgramRiskManagement
LE #
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 9: Lack of Risk Management
3.5.11.
problems.
3.5.12.
phases.
3.5.13.
planningprocess.
3.7.3.
3.8.1.
3.10.
3.10.1.
programsarecontracted.Issuesmallcontractstomaturecriticaltechnologiesbeforestartingalargescaleprogram.
3.10.2.
Instituteclearguidelinesfortechnologymaturationandinsertionprocessinyourprogram.Clearlydefinewhattype
andleveloftechnology,cost,andscheduleriskisacceptableunderwhatcircumstances(paralysisbyanalysisvs.
programfailure).
3.10.3.
Fullyunderstandboththerisksandopportunitiesinvolvedintheuseofnew/immaturetechnologiesandnew
engineering/manufacturingprocesses.
3.10.4.
Utilizeprogrammanagementstrategiesthatproducethebestbalancebetweentechnologyriskandrewardinyour
program,suchasevolutionaryacquisitionandincrementalorspiraldevelopment.
3.10.5.
Extensivelyuseriskmanagementtoacceptappropriatelevelsoftechnologyriskandensuresufficientmitigation
actionsareinplace.
3.10.6.
Removeshowstoppingresearchandunproventechnologyfromthecriticalpathoflargeprograms.Issueseparate
developmentcontracts,staffwithcolocatedexperts,andincludeitintheriskmitigationplan.Reexaminefor
integrationintoprogramaftersignificantprogresshasbeenmadeordefertofuturesystems.
3.10.7.
Providestablefundingfortechnologydevelopmentandmaturation.Thiswillsupportasteady,plannedpipelineof
newtechnologiestobeinsertedintotheprogram.
3.10.9.
3.10.11.
4.10.10.
5.2.2.
6.1.
6.6.
6.6.1.
6.6.2.
6.6.3.
6.6.4.
6.6.5.
6.6.6.
162
LE #
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 9: Lack of Risk Management
6.6.7.
managementprocess.
6.6.8.
6.6.9.
6.6.10.
TableA12:LeanEnablersDirectlyAddressingChallenge10:PoorProgramAcquisitionandContractingPractices
LE #
Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 10: Poor Contracting and Acquisition
3.4.2.
Ifa"lowballing"isdetectedonafixedpricecontract,insistoncontinuingthefixedpricecontract,orprogram
terminationandrebid.Donotallowswitchingtocostplus.
3.7.1.
3.7.8.
3.10.
3.10.1.
3.10.2.
programfailure).
3.10.3.
3.10.4.
Utilizeprogrammanagementstrategiesthatproducethebestbalancebetweentechnologyriskandrewardinthe
3.10.5.
actionsareinplace.
3.10.6.
3.10.7.
3.10.8.
3.10.9.
3.10.10.
3.10.11.
UtilizeIndependenttechnicalreviewstoconfirmacapabilitytodeliverandintegrateanynewtechnologythatcould
5.2.
5.2.1.
5.2.2.
5.2.3.
6.1.
163
A.5.2 MappingtoProgramManagementPerformanceDomains
TablesA13throughA17containtheLeanEnablers,sortedbyProgramManagementPerformanceDomain.
TableA13:LeanEnablersRelatedtoProgramGovernance
#
Enablers and Subenablers Related to Program Governance
1.3.
1.3.1.
Useandcommunicateflowdownofresponsibility,authorityandaccountability(RAA)tomakedecisionsatlowest
appropriatelevel.
1.3.2.
1.3.3.
experience.
1.3.4.
1.3.5.
1.4.
1.4.1.
1.4.2.
1.4.3.
1.4.4.
1.4.5.
1.4.6.
1.4.7.
othermeans.
1.5.
1.5.1.
1.5.2.
1.5.3.
1.5.5.
1.5.6.
1.6.
1.6.1.
1.6.2.
1.6.3.
2.1.5.
2.3.10.
2.3.11.
2.3.3.
adaptivetochanges.
2.3.4.
2.4.1.
representativeoftheneed,stable,complete,crystalclear,deconflicted,freeofwastefulspecifications,andas
simpleaspossible.
164
2.4.10.
2.4.11.
Clearlyarticulatethetoplevelobjectives,value,programbenefitsandfunctionalrequirementsbeforeformal
2.4.12.
Useacleardecisiongatethatreviewsthematurityofrequirements,thetradeoffsbetweentoplevelobjectives,as
wellasthelevelofremainingrequirementsrisksbeforedetailedformalrequirementsorarequestforproposalis
issued.
2.4.2.
Useonlyhighlyexperiencedpeopleandexpertinstitutionstowriteprogramrequirements,RFPsandcontracts.
2.4.3.
toweringexperienceandexpertisetosortoutandmaturetherequirementsandspecificationsintheRFP.This
proxymustremainaccountableforthequalityoftherequirements,includingpersonalaccountability.
2.4.4.
programs.
2.4.5.
stakeholders.
2.4.6.
throughout.
2.4.7.
demonstrated.
2.5.
Clarify,derive,andprioritizerequirementsearly,often,andproactively.
2.5.1.
2.5.10.
Employagilemethodstomanagenecessaryrequirementschange,andmaketheprogramdeliverablesrobust
againstthosechanges.Makebothprogramprocessesandprogramdeliverablesreusable,reconfigurable,and
scalable.
2.5.2.
requirementscreep.
2.5.3.
Usearchitecturalmethodsandmodelingtocreateastandardprogramsystemrepresentation(3DintegratedCAE
toolset,mockups,prototypes,models,simulations,andsoftwaredesigntools)thatallowinteractionswith
customersandotherstakeholdersasthebestmeansofdrawingoutrequirements.
2.5.6.
Activelypromotethematurationofstakeholderrequirements,forexample,byprovidingdetailedtradeoffstudies,
2.5.8.
Createeffectivechannelsforclarificationofrequirements(e.g.,involvingcustomerstakeholdersinprogramteams).
2.5.9.
Failearlyandfailoftenthroughrapidlearningtechniques(e.g.,prototyping,tests,simulations,digitalmodels,or
spiraldevelopment).
2.6.
Activelyminimizethebureaucratic,regulatory.andcomplianceburdenontheprogramandsubprojects.
2.6.2.
internalreportingrequirements.Onlyrequirereportsthatareclearlynecessary,andalignreportingrequirements
toreduceredundantreporting.
2.6.3.
3.1.2.
3.1.4.
Useformalvaluestreammappingmethodstoidentifyandeliminatemanagementandengineeringwaste,andto
tailorandscaletasks.
3.10.6.
165
3.10.7.
3.10.8.
3.10.9.
3.2.
3.2.1.
3.2.2.
Setupasingle,colocatedorganizationtohandletheentiresystemsengineeringandarchitectingfortheentire
3.2.3.
3.2.5.
Useacleararchitecturaldescriptionoftheagreedsolutiontoplancoherentprograms,engineering,andcommercial
structures.
3.2.8.
3.3.
3.3.1.
3.3.3.
3.3.4.
3.3.5.
3.3.6.
3.4.
3.4.1.
winthecontract.
3.4.2.
Iflowballingisdetectedonafixedpricecontract,insistoncontinuingthefixedpricecontract,orterminatethe
program,andrebid.Donotallowswitchingtocostpluscontracts.
3.4.3.
3.5.10.
3.5.2.
3.5.6.
Propagatefrontloadingofprogramthroughoutcriticalsubprojectswithsimilarworkshopstothosedescribed
previously.
3.5.7.
Ascertainwhatisavailabletotheprogram(resources,talent,budgetandtimeline)andwhatnotavailablepriorto
3.7.1.
3.7.10.
3.7.11.
3.7.2.
programphases.
3.7.5.
166
3.7.6.
3.7.8.
3.7.9.
3.8.
3.8.1.
3.8.2.
3.8.3.
3.8.4.
Usemetricsstructuredtomotivatetherightbehavior.Beverycarefultoavoidtheunintendedconsequencesthat
comefromthewrongmetricsincentivizingundesirablebehavior.
3.8.5.
4.1.
4.1.1.
4.1.2.
phases.
4.10.7.
4.10.8.
metrics.
4.10.9.
4.2.
Ensureclearresponsibility,accountability.andauthority(RAA)throughouttheprogramfrominitialrequirements
4.2.1.
4.2.2.
4.2.3.
4.2.5.
4.2.6.
4.3.
4.3.1.
programsuccess.
4.3.2.
Ensurethattheprogrammanagerpossessesanappropriatebackgroundregardingbusiness,generalmanagement
andengineeringexperience,leadershipandpeopleskills,andexperienceworkingonhighlytechnicalengineering
programs.
4.3.3.
Ensurethatthecompetency,technicalknowledgeandotherrelevantdomainknowledgeoftheprogrammanager
4.3.4.
Ensurethattheprogrammanagerhasclarityovertheimpactoftechnical,requirement,andscopechanges(for
examplebycleartraceabilityofrequirementsandeffectiveuseofchangemanagementcontrolboards).
4.4.
effective.
4.4.1.
4.4.2.
4.5.6.
167
4.5.7.
Defineaclear,streamlinedprocessforcriticaldecisionmaking,resolvingconflictsofinterest,andconvergingon
consensus.
4.5.8.
4.5.9.
Makedecisionscarefullybyconsensus,maintainingclearresponsibility,andthoroughlyconsideringalloptions.
Searchforsolutionstoissuesthatsatisfymultiplestakeholderssimultaneously.Stakeholderinterestsmust
convergeovertime.
4.6.
4.6.1.
Ensureprogramgovernancehasfullview,controlandinfluenceovertheentireprogramtoeffectivelyguideand
4.6.3.
4.6.4.
Useagatedprocessforvalidating,planning,andexecutionoftheprogramandleveragefunctionalexpertiseat
thesegates.
4.6.5.
design,andhardwaredesign.
4.6.6.
4.7.
4.7.5.
4.7.6.
4.8.3.
platforms.
4.8.4.
4.8.5.
4.9.
4.9.1.
everythingwithmultiplewhys;(b.)Alignprocessflowtodecisionflow;(c.)Resolveallissuesastheyoccurin
frequentintegrativeevents;and(d.)Discusstradeoffsandoptions.
4.9.10.
AvoidexcessivelycomplexandoverlyfeaturerichITtools.Tailortoolstoprogramneeds,nottheotherwayaround.
5.1.3.
eachtaskuseaSIPOC(supplier,inputs,process,outputs,customer)modeltobetterunderstandthevaluestream.
5.2.
5.2.1.
5.2.2.
5.2.3.
6.1.
6.1.1.
Useexistingprogrammanagementstandards,guidelinesandapplicableorganizationalmaturitymodelstoyour
6.1.4.
6.1.5.
ReviewanduseexistingLeanbasedenterpriseandprogramselfassessmenttoolstoquicklyidentifyweaknessesor
goalsandtrackprogressontheprocessimprovementjourney.
6.2.2.
theenterprise,acentralrepositoryofLeanmanagementmethodsandaLeanbusinesscasethattiesLeanpractices
6.2.3.
teams.
168
6.2.4.
6.2.6.
StartsmallbyselectingthemostbeneficialLeanenablersfortheprogram.
6.2.7.
6.2.8.
6.3.1.
Implementthebasicsofquality.Donotcreate,passon,oracceptdefects
6.4.
6.4.1.
6.4.2.
6.4.3.
implementation.
6.4.4.
resultingchange.
6.4.5.
6.4.6.
6.5.
6.5.1.
Proactivelyaligntheprogramwithchangesintheenvironmenttokeepfocusedonachievingprogrambenefits:
Redirect,replanorstopindividualprogramcomponents.
6.5.2.
programcomponents.
6.6.
6.6.2.
6.6.3.
6.7.1.
6.7.4.
TableA14:LeanEnablersRelatedtoProgramStrategyAlignment
#
Enablers and Subenablers related to Program Strategy Alignment
2.1.1.
Definevalueastheoutcomeofanactivitythatsatisfiesatleastthreeconditions:(a.)Theexternalcustomer
stakeholdersarewillingtopayforvalue;(b.)Transformsinformationormaterialorreducesuncertainty;and(c.)
2.1.2.
2.1.3.
2.4.8.
Alwaysclearlylinkrequirementstospecificcustomerstakeholderneedsandtracerequirementsfromthistoplevelto
bottomlevel.
3.2.6.
stakeholders.
3.2.7.
3.3.2.
3.9.1.
Createaplantoappropriatelyintegrateandalignprogrammanagement,systemsengineering,andotherhighlevel
planningandcoordinationfunctions.
169
Enablers and Subenablers related to Program Strategy Alignment
4.5.11.
process.
6.1.
6.1.3.
6.2.
6.2.1.
6.2.5.
IntegratetheLeanactivitiesinprogrammanagementintoanoverallchangemanagementandprocessimprovement
approachinordertoassuresustainabilityoftheimprovements,aswellasusesynergieswithexistingprocess
improvementactivities.
6.3.
6.3.6.
6.3.7.
TableA15:LeanEnablersRelatedtoProgramStakeholderEngagement
#
Enablers and Subenablers Related to Program Stakeholder Engagement
1.1.8.
behavior."
1.6.5.
1.6.6.
Supportthedevelopmentofinformalandsocialnetworkswithintheprogramandtokeystakeholdersintheprogram
environment.
1.6.7.
2.1.4.
2.3.
2.3.1.
andrequirements.
2.3.2.
2.3.5.
2.3.6.
2.3.7.
2.3.8.
2.3.9.
2.4.
Develophighqualityprogramrequirementsamongcustomerstakeholdersbeforebiddingandexecutionprocess
begins.
2.4.9.
2.5.4.
Listenforandcaptureunspokencustomerrequirements
2.5.5.
2.5.7.
2.6.1.
Strivetominimizeandstreamlinetheburdenofpaperworkforexternalstakeholdersbyactivelyengagingtheminthe
processandclearlyarticulatingandaligningthebenefitgeneratedbyeachreport.
170
Enablers and Subenablers Related to Program Stakeholder Engagement
3.11.
3.11.1.
3.11.2.
Plantousevisualmethodswhereverpossibletocommunicateschedules,workloads,andchangestocustomer
requirements,etc.
3.5.15.
3.5.5.
3.7.
3.7.3.
3.7.4.
3.7.7.
Communicatetosupplierswithcrystalclarityallexpectations,includingthecontextandneed,andallproceduresand
expectationsforacceptancetests;andensuretherequirementsarestable.
4.5.10.
Proactivelymanagetradeoffsandresolveconflictsofinterestamongstakeholders.Donotignoreortrytoglossthem
over.
5.1.4.
5.1.5.
5.1.6.
Fornonroutinetasks,avoidreworkbycoordinatingtaskrequirementswithinternalcustomers.
6.1.
TableA16:LeanEnablersRelatedtoProgramBenefitsManagement
#
Enablers and Subenablers Related to Program Benefits Management
1.6.4.
2.1.
2.2.
2.2.1.
2.2.2.
Alignprogramresourcestoachieveplannedbenefitsandincorporateactivitiesthatwillenablethebenefitsachieved
tobesustainedfollowingthecloseoftheprogram.
2.2.3.
3.1.
3.1.1.
3.1.3.
3.2.4.
Developaclearvisionandholisticviewofthefuturestateoftheprogramenterprise,includingthefutureportfolioof
products,thefutureorganization,andthefuturevaluestream.Provideguidanceonaclearpathforwardandensure
thatresourcesarealignedwiththisvision.
3.5.14.
Programmanagermustpersonallyunderstand,clarifyandremoveambiguity,conflictsandwastefromkey
4.9.2.
Bewillingtochallengethecustomer'sassumptionsontechnicalandmeritocraticgroundsandtomaximizeprogram
6.1.
6.1.2.
171
TableA17:LeanEnablersRelatedtoProgramLifecycleManagement
#
Enablers and Subenablers Related to Program Life-cycle Management
1.1.
1.1.1.
1.1.10.
1.1.2.
Investinpeopleselectionanddevelopmenttoaddressenterpriseandprogramexcellence.Ensurethatthehiring
1.1.3.
Programleadershipmustactasamentorandprovideamodelfordesiredbehaviorintheentireprogramteam,
suchastrust,respect,honesty,empowerment,teamwork,stability,motivation,anddriveforexcellence.
1.1.4.
keywords.
1.1.5.
1.1.6.
1.1.7.
1.1.9.
1.2.
1.2.1.
1.2.2.
1.3.
1.5.4.
3.10.
3.10.1.
3.10.10.
3.10.11.
3.10.2.
programfailure).
3.10.3.
3.10.4.
Utilizeprogrammanagementstrategiesthatproducethebestbalancebetweentechnologyriskandrewardinyour
3.10.5.
actionsareinplace.
3.5.
3.5.1.
Planearlyforconsistentrobustnessandrightthefirsttimeunder"normal"circumstances,insteadofherobehavior
inlater"crisis"situations.
3.5.11.
problems.
3.5.12.
phases.
3.5.13.
planningprocess.
172
3.5.3.
Establishasystemandprocessthatallowscomprehensive,effectiveandefficientupfrontplanningofprogram
3.5.8.
HoldLeanacceleratedplanningsessionsattheprogramlevelandforkeysubprojects,engagingallstakeholdersin
3.5.9.
Forallcriticalactivities,definewhoisresponsible,approving,supporting,andinforming(alsoknownasRACI
matrix),usingastandardizedtool,payingattentiontoprecedenceoftasksanddocumentinghandoffs.
3.6.
3.6.1.
3.6.2.
3.7.12.
rules,butwatchforhighriskitems,whichmustbehandledatthetoplevel.
3.9.
3.9.2.
3.9.3.
functions.
3.9.4.
Planbelowfullcapacitytoenableflowofworkwithoutaccumulationofvariability,andpermitschedulingflexibility
inworkloading,thatis,haveappropriatecontingenciesandschedulebuffers.
3.9.5.
3.9.6.
Carefullyplanforprecedenceofengineeringandmanagementtasks(whichtasktofeedwhatothertaskswithwhat
dataandwhen),understandingtaskdependenciesandparentchildrelationships.
3.9.7.
Updatedetailedplanningregularlytoreflectnewinformation,beingconsistentwiththelongtermstrategicplan.
Donotforceprogramstoexecuteagainstadetailed,outdatedplanthatwasdevelopedbasedonincomplete
information.
4.10.
4.10.1.
4.10.10.
4.10.11.
4.10.2.
4.10.3.
4.10.4.
4.10.5.
Usetrafficlightsystem(green,yellow,red)toreporttaskstatusvisually(good,warning,critical)andmakecertain
problemsarenotconcealed.
4.10.6.
4.2.4.
4.4.3.
Maximizecolocationopportunitiesforprogrammanagement,systemsengineering,businessleadershipandother
teamstoenableconstantclosecoordination,andresolveallresponsibility,communication,interface,anddecision
makingissuesupfrontearlyintheprogram.
4.5.
Pursuecollaborativeandinclusivedecisionmakingthatresolvestherootcausesofissues
4.5.1.
4.5.2.
4.5.3.
4.5.4.
issues.
173
4.5.5.
4.6.2.
benefitsandoutcomes(e.g.,programrisk,communicationandresourcemanagement).
4.7.1.
4.7.2.
Maximizecoordinationofeffortandflow
4.7.3.
4.7.4.
Usefrequent,timely,openandhonestcommunication.
4.8.
collaboration
4.8.1.
Standardizeprogrammanagementmetricsandreportingsystem
4.8.2.
4.8.3.
platforms.
4.9.3.
4.9.4.
Optimizehumanresourceswhenallocatingvalueadded(VA)andrequired,nonvalueadded(RNVA)tasks.a.Use
professionalstodovalueaddingprofessionalwork.b.Whenprofessionalsarenotabsolutelyrequired,usenon
professionals(supportstaff)todorequired,nonvalueaddingtasks
4.9.5.
4.9.6.
information,lowinformationininventory,lownumberofconcurrenttasksperemployee,smalltasktimes,wide
4.9.7.
4.9.8.
Minimizethenumberofthesoftwarerevisionupdates(e.g.,noncriticalupdates)ofITtoolsandcentrallycontrol
theupdatereleasestopreventinformationchurning.
4.9.9.
5.1.
Pulltasksandoutputsbasedonneed,andrejectothersaswaste
5.1.1.
5.1.2.
Promotethecultureinwhichpeoplepullknowledgeastheyneeditandlimitthesupplyofinformationtogenuine
usersonly.
5.1.7.
6.1.
Makeeffectiveuseofexistingprogrammanagementandorganizationalmaturitystandards
6.3.2.
Followbasicproblemsolvingtechniques(e.g.,PlanDoCheckAct)andadoptacultureofstoppingandpermanently
fixingproblemswhentheyoccur
6.3.3.
6.3.4.
6.3.5.
6.3.8.
6.3.9.
andseparatedallpowerfulprojectorganization.
6.4.7.
bothsides.
6.6.1.
174
6.6.10.
PaycloseattentiontotheopportunitiesandcapturethemalongwithRisks.
6.6.4.
Reduceprograminternaluncertaintiesandotheruncertaintiesthatcanbeinfluencedtoamaximumdegree
6.6.5.
Maketheprogramresilientagainstexternaluncertaintiesorotheruncertaintiesthatcannotbeinfluenced
6.6.6.
Developsufficientriskmanagementskillsintheprogramandprovideadequateresources
6.6.7.
managementprocess.
6.6.8.
6.6.9.
6.7.
Striveforperfectcommunication,coordinationandcollaborationacrosspeopleandprocesses
6.7.10.
Developaneffectivebodyofknowledgethatiseasilyaccessible,historical,searchable,sharedbyteam,and
6.7.2.
6.7.3.
6.7.5.
6.7.6.
Publishinstructionsforemaildistributions,instantmessagingandelectroniccommunications.
6.7.7.
6.7.8.
Publishadirectoryandorganizationchartoftheentireprogramteamandprovidetrainingtonewhiresonhowto
6.7.9.
6.8.
stakeholders
6.8.1.
6.8.2.
standards.
6.8.3.
6.8.4.
A.5.3 MappingtoINCOSESystemsEngineeringProcesses
TheINCOSESystemsEngineeringHandbookpartitionsSystemsEngineeringinto26processes,consistentwith
theISO/IEC15288:2008standard.(ForanexplanationoftheINCOSESystemsEngineeringProcesses,please
refertoSection3.3.)Thefollowingtablemapsthe329LeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringProgramsonto
those26processes.
TableA18:KeytotheSystemsEngineeringProcesses
SE Process Number
Process name
4
TechnicalProcesses
4.1
StakeholderRequirementsDefinitionProcess
4.2
RequirementsAnalysisProcess
4.3
ArchitecturalDesignProcess
4.4
ImplementationProcess
4.5
IntegrationProcess
175
SE Process Number
Process name
4.6
VerificationProcess
4.7
TransitionProcess
4.8
ValidationProcess
4.9
OperationProcess
4.10
MaintenanceProcess
4.11
DisposalProcess
5
ProjectProcesses
5.1
ProjectPlanningProcess
5.2
ProjectAssessmentandControlProcess
5.3
DecisionManagementProcess
5.4
RiskManagementProcess
5.5
ConfigurationManagementProcess
5.6
InformationManagementProcess
5.7
MeasurementProcess
6
AgreementProcesses
6.1
AcquisitionProcess
6.2
SupplyProcess
7
OrganizationalProjectEnablingProcesses
7.1
LifeCycleModelManagementProcess
7.2
InfrastructureManagementProcess
7.3
ProjectPortfolioManagementProcess
7.4
HumanResourceManagementProcess
7.5
QualityManagementProcess
8
TailoringProcesses
8.1
TailoringProcess
AdditionalProcessCategories
ALL
LeanEnablersthatrefertoallSystemsEngineeringprocesses
EPP
Enterpriseplanningandpreparationprocesses(seebelow)
TheSystemsEngineeringHandbookillustrateseachprocesswithacontextdiagram,i.e.fiveboxestitled:Inputs,
Activities,Outputs,Controls,andGeneralEnablers.TheboxeslabeledGeneralEnablersindifferentdiagrams
includevariouscombinationsofthefollowingbullets:
x
x
x
x
Organizational/EnterprisePolicies,Procedures,andStandards
Organizational/EnterpriseInfrastructure
ProjectInfrastructure
ImplementationEnablingSystem
TheseGeneralEnablersshouldnotbeconfusedwithLeanEnablerspresentedinthepresentdocument.The
INCOSEGeneralEnablersarenotfocusedonLean,andaredefinedatmuchhigherlevelthantheLeanEnablers.
Themappingof329LeanEnablersandsubenablersontothe26INCOSEprocesseswasperformedtosome
extentbytrialanderror.Thedecisionwasselfevidentinmostcases,butnotall.Whenindoubt,thegiven
enablerhasbeenplacedinonlyoneprocesswhichwasjudgedthemostappropriatefromanimplementation
pointofview.
176
Theresultsofthemappingare:
x
Thelargestgroupof81enablerswasjudgedtoapplytoallINCOSEprocesses,andthosearelistedbelow
underaspecialheading"AllProcesses".TheseenablersaddressthecriticalaspectsofSEwhichare
oftenignoredintraditionalprogramsandinSEhandbooks,andwhichflownaturallyfromLeanThinking,
forexampleexcellentcoordinationandcommunication,alignmentforcustomervalue,teamwork,
betterinteractionsbetweenstakeholders,emphasisonperformingtherightworkrightthefirsttime,
excellentinterpersonalrelationsandhumanhabits.
ThenextinsizeistheProjectPlanningProcesswith58enablers.Thisisconsistentwithastrongfocusof
LeanEnablersonimprovingfrontendactivitiesofprograms:betterpreparations,betterplanningfor
valuecapture,betterplanningofprogram,planningforbestcommunicationandcoordinationmeans,
betterfrontloading,strongerintegrationofSEandPD,andbetterhumanrelationsamongstakeholders.
FollowingtheapproachofmappingtheLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering(seeSection1.6),we
decidedtodefineanewprocess,termedEnterprisePreparationProcess(EPP).Itliststhose17Lean
enablerswhichbenefitallpresentandfutureprogramsintheEnterprise(corporation),andtherefore
shouldbeimplementedattheEnterpriseratherthanaprogramlevel,ifpossible.
EightSEProcessesindicatezerodedicatedLeanenablers:Integration,Verification,Transition,
Validation,Operations,Maintenance,Disposal,andInfrastructureManagement.Thisisnotanindication
thattheseeightprocessesneednoLeanwisdom.Instead,thewaytoimprovetheseprocessesis
indirect,byapplyingLeanwisdomtothefrontendprocesseswheremostofthecriticaldecisionsare
made(enterpriseandprogrampreparations,programplanning,valuecapture,designfrontloading,best
engineeringpractices,implementation,quality,andmanagement).Inparticular,the81Leanenablers
listedunderAllProcesseswillimprovetheeightprocessesprofoundly.
TableA19:LeanEnablers,SortedbySystemsEngineeringProcessNumber
SE
Process #
LE #
Lean Enabler for Managing Engineering Programs
4
SystemsEngineering:TechnicalProcesses
4.1
StakeholderRequirementsDefinitionProcess
4.1
2.1.
Establishthevalueandbenefitoftheprogramtothestakeholders
4.1
2.1.1.
Definevalueastheoutcomeofanactivitythatsatisfiesatleastthreeconditions.a.Theexternalcustomer
stakeholdersarewillingtopayforvalue.b.Transformsinformationormaterialorreducesuncertainty.c.
4.1
2.1.2.
Definevalueaddedintermsofvaluetothecustomerstakeholdersandtheirneeds
4.1
2.1.3.
clarity.
4.1
2.1.4.
4.1
2.1.5.
ExplaincustomerstakeholderculturetoProgramemployees,i.e.thevaluesystem,approach,attitude,
4.1
2.3.10.
perceptionofprogrambenefits
4.1
2.5.
Clarify,deriveandprioritizerequirementsearly,oftenandproactively
4.1
2.5.10.
Employagilemethodstomanagenecessaryrequirementschangeandmaketheprogramdeliverables
robustagainstthosechanges.Makebothprogramprocessesandprogramdeliverablesreusable,
reconfigurable,andscalable.
4.1
2.5.4.
Listenforandcaptureunspokencustomerrequirements
4.1
2.5.6.
feasibilitystudiesandvirtualprototypes
177
SE
Process #
LE #
4.1
2.5.7.
Facilitatecommunicationbetweendifferentandpossiblydivergingstakeholderstodevelopashared
understandingoftheprogramamongthestakeholders,clearlyidentifyingandincorporatingthevarious
interestsofdifferentstakeholders(aligned,indifferent,oropposed),andestablishtrust.
4.1
2.5.8.
Createeffectivechannelsforclarificationofrequirements(e.g.,involvingcustomerstakeholdersin
programteams)
4.1
3.5.14.
Programmanagermustpersonallyunderstand,clarifyandremoveambiguity,conflictsandwastefromkey
requirementsandexpectationsattheprogramstart
4.2
RequirementsAnalysisProcess
4.2
3.10.9.
technologyreadinesslevels
4.3
ArchitecturalDesignProcess
4.3
2.3.3.
4.3
2.5.3.
Usearchitecturalmethodsandmodelingtocreateastandardprogramsystemrepresentation(3D
integratedCAEtoolset,mockups,prototypes,models,simulations,andsoftwaredesigntools)thatallow
interactionswithcustomersandotherstakeholdersasthebestmeansofdrawingoutrequirements.
4.3
2.5.9.
modelsorspiraldevelopment)
4.3
3.2.
ActivelyArchitectandmanagetheProgramEnterprisetooptimizeitsperformanceasasystem
4.3
3.2.1.
Keepactivitiesduringearlyprogramphasesinternalandcolocated,asthereisahighneedfor
coordination.
4.3
3.2.2.
Setupasingle,colocatedorganizationtohandletheentireSystemsEngineeringandArchitectingforthe
entireeffortthroughoutthelifecycle,inordertoincreaseRAA.
4.3
3.2.3.
EnsurethatSystemsEngineeringandArchitectingareacentralpartofprogrammanagementandnot
outsourcedorsubcontracted,astheseactivitiesrequireahighlevelofcoordination.
4.3
3.2.5.
Useacleararchitecturaldescriptionoftheagreedsolutiontoplanacoherentprogram,engineeringand
4.3
3.2.8.
Insistonadoptinganadaptivearchitecturethatmeetstheoperationalneeds,whilenotcateringtoany
proprietarytechnologiesorcapabilitiesofpotentialcontractors
4.3
3.3.
Pursuemultiplesolutionsetsinparallel
4.3
3.3.2.
4.3
3.3.3.
Forkeydecisions,explorealternativeoptionsinparallelaslongasfeasible.Forexample,usethemethod
ofSetbasedConcurrentEngineering
4.3
3.3.4.
Exploremultipleconcepts,architecturesanddesignsearly.
4.4
ImplementationProcess
4.4
3.3.5.
4.4
3.3.6.
4.4
6.5.1.
Proactivelyaligntheprogramwithchangesintheenvironmenttokeepfocusedonachievingprogram
benefits:Redirect,replanorstopindividualprogramcomponents
5.
SystemsEngineering:ProjectProcesses
5.1
ProjectPlanningProcess
5.1
1.1.2.
Investinpeopleselectionanddevelopmenttoaddressenterpriseandprogramexcellence.Ensurethat
5.1
1.1.9.
5.1
1.5.4.
Captureandsharetacitknowledgetostabilizetheprogramwhenteammemberschange
5.1
1.6.1.
178
SE
Process #
LE #
5.1
1.6.2.
Forvirtuallycolocatedteams,investtimeandmoneyupfronttobuildpersonalrelationshipinfaceto
facesettings
5.1
1.6.8.
customers,superiors,programemployeesandkeycontractors/suppliers.
5.1
2.2.
Focusallprogramactivitiesonthebenefitsthattheprogramintendstodeliver
5.1
2.2.1.
Allprogramactivities,includingcommunicationsandmetrics,mustbefocusedontheintendedoutcomes
oftheprogramtheprogramsplannedbenefits.
5.1
2.2.2.
Alignprogramresourcestoachieveplannedbenefitsandincorporateactivitiesthatwillenablethe
benefitsachievedtobesustainedfollowingthecloseoftheprogram
5.1
2.2.3.
organizationalgoals(e.g.,competitivenessandprofitability)
5.1
2.3.11.
Useprogramcomponentselectionandreviewwiththekeystakeholdersasanopportunitytocontinuously
focustheprogramonbenefitsdelivery
5.1
2.3.4.
5.1
2.3.5.
Structurecommunicationamongstakeholders(who,howoften,andwhat)
5.1
2.3.6.
Createsharedunderstandingofprogramcontent,goals,statusandchallengesamongkeystakeholders
5.1
2.5.1.
Developanagileprocesstoanticipate,accommodate,andcommunicatechangingcustomerrequirements
5.1
3.1.
Mapthemanagementandengineeringvaluestreamsandeliminatenonvalueaddedelements
5.1
3.1.1.
Plantodeveloponlywhatneedstobedeveloped
5.1
3.1.3.
Havecrossfunctionalstakeholdersandprogramleadershipworktogethertobuildtheagreedvalue
stream.
5.1
3.11.
Developacommunicationsplan
5.1
3.11.1.
5.1
3.11.2.
requirements,etc.
5.1
3.2.6.
Changetheprogrammindsettofocusontheentireprogramenterpriseandthevalueitdeliversto
customerstakeholders
5.1
3.3.1.
Plantoutilizecrossfunctionalteamsmadeupofthemostexperiencedandcompatiblepeopleatthe
startoftheprojecttolookatabroadrangeofsolutionsets.
5.1
3.5.
Frontloadandintegratetheprogram
5.1
3.5.1.
behaviorinlater"crisis"situations
5.1
3.5.10.
Transitionthefrontloadingoftheprogramandkeyprojectsintoacontinuousplanningandimprovement
processwithregularworkshops
5.1
3.5.13.
Ensurethattechnicalchallengeswithintheprogramareadequatelyaddressedbymanagementstaff
duringtheplanningprocess.
5.1
3.5.15.
5.1
3.5.2.
Upfrontintheprogram,dedicateenoughtimeandresourcestounderstandwhatthekeyrequirements
andintendedprogrambenefitsreallyare.
5.1
3.5.3.
Establishasystemandprocessthatallowscomprehensive,effectiveandefficientupfrontplanningof
programbeforeexecutionbegins.
5.1
3.5.4.
Theprogramleadershipteam(programmanager,technicalmanagers,leadsystemengineersetc.)must
identifykeystakeholdersthatwillbeinvolvedthroughouttheprogramlifecyclebeforetheprogram
executionbegins.
179
SE
Process #
LE #
5.1
3.5.5.
Holdaprogramkickoffmeetingwithkeystakeholdersthatidentifiestheprogrambenefitsandthekey
mechanismstorealizethesebenefits(e.g.,valuestreammapping),identifyandassignrolesand
responsibilities,identifykeydependenciesandrisksinprogram,setkeymilestones.andestablishanaction
plan.
5.1
3.5.7.
Ascertainwhatisavailabletotheprogram(resources,talent,budgetandtimeline)andwhatnotavailable
priortomakingcommitmenttothecustomersandotherstakeholders.
5.1
3.5.8.
HoldLeanAcceleratedPlanningsessionsattheprogramlevelandforkeysubprojects,engagingall
stakeholdersindevelopingmasterschedule,valuestreammap,risksandopportunities,keyassumptions
andactionitems.
5.1
3.6.
5.1
3.6.1.
Developprobabilisticestimatesforcost,scheduleandothercriticalplanningforecasts.
5.1
3.6.2.
5.1
3.9.
DevelopanIntegratedProgramScheduleatthelevelofdetailforwhichyouhavedependableinformation.
5.1
3.9.1.
Createaplantoappropriatelyintegrateandalignprogrammanagement,systemsengineeringandother
5.1
3.9.2.
5.1
3.9.3.
Synchronizeworkflowactivitiesusingschedulingacrossfunctions,andevenmoredetailedscheduling
withinfunctions.
5.1
3.9.4.
flexibilityinworkloading,i.e.,haveappropriatecontingenciesandschedulebuffers.
5.1
3.9.5.
Planforlevelworkflowandwithprecisiontoenablescheduleadherenceanddriveoutarrivaltime
variation.
5.1
3.9.6.
withwhatdataandwhen),understandingtaskdependenciesandparentchildrelationships.
5.1
3.9.7.
Updatedetailedplanningregularlytoreflectnewinformation,beingconsistentwiththelongterm
strategicplan.Donotforceprogramstoexecuteagainstadetailed,outdatedplanthatwasdeveloped
basedonincompleteinformation.
5.1
4.1.
5.1
4.1.1.
5.1
4.1.2.
proposalphases.
5.1
4.4.3.
Maximizecolocationopportunitiesforprogrammanagement,systemsengineering,businessleadership
andotherteamstoenableconstantclosecoordination,andresolveallresponsibility,communication,
interface,anddecisionmakingissuesupfrontearlyintheprogram.
5.1
4.6.1.
Ensureprogramgovernancehasfullview,control,andinfluenceovertheentireprogramtoeffectively
guideandbalancetheprogramanditsindividualcomponentsthroughoutitslifecycle.
5.1
4.6.5.
Ensureintegrationbetweendifferenttopicaldomainsthroughouttheprogramlifecycle,forexample,
architecture,software,andhardwaredesign.
5.1
4.7.2.
5.1
4.9.6.
5.1
6.3.9.
5.1
6.7.1.
Developageneralprogrampolicy/guideline/frameworkthatoutlinesexpectationsregarding
communication,coordination,andcollaboration.
180
SE
Process #
LE #
5.1
6.7.4.
5.1
6.7.6.
5.1
6.7.8.
Publishadirectoryandorganizationalchartoftheentireprogramteamandprovidetrainingtonewhires
onhowtolocatetheneedednodesofknowledge.
5.2
ProjectAssessmentandControlProcess
5.2
4.6.
5.2
4.6.2.
Employprogramsupportingprocessestointegrateprogramcomponentsforeffectivedeliveryofthe
programsbenefitsandoutcomes(e.g.,programrisk,communication,andresourcemanagement)
5.2
4.6.3.
Seekandmaintainindependentreviewsoftheprogram.Assignteamsoutsideoftheprogramtoobserve
andassesstheexecutionandhealthoftheprogram.Engagenonadvocatesinreviewprocess.
5.2
4.6.4.
Useagatedprocessforvalidating,planning,andexecutionoftheprogramandleveragefunctional
expertiseatthesegates.
5.2
6.1.
5.2
6.1.1.
Useexistingprogrammanagementstandards,guidelinesandapplicableorganizationalmaturitymodelsto
theprogramsbestadvantage.
5.2
6.1.2.
Focusonachievingtheprogrambenefitswhenselecting,customizing,andimplementingprogram
managementstandards,guidelines,andmaturitymodels.
5.2
6.1.3.
Integrateimplementationprocesswithexistingprogramandbusinessstrategytoanoverallprogram
5.2
6.1.5.
ReviewanduseexistingLeanbasedenterpriseandprogramselfassessmenttoolstoquicklyidentify
weaknessesorgoalsandtrackprogressontheprocessimprovementjourney.
5.3
DecisionManagementProcess
5.3
1.3.1.
5.3
4.5.
5.3
4.5.1.
Ifdecisionsarebasedonassumptionsthatarelikelytochange,keeptrackofthoseassumptions,and
adjustthedecisionswhentheychange.
5.3
4.5.10.
Proactivelymanagetradeoffsandresolveconflictsofinterestamongstakeholders.Donotignoreortryto
glossthemover.
5.3
4.5.11.
Ensurethatsystemdesign,organizationaldesign,contractdesign,riskmanagement,decisionmaking
amongthestakeholders,metrics,andincentivestructurearealignedtosupportthisongoinganddynamic
decisionmakingprocess.
5.3
4.5.2.
Definetheinformationneedaswellastimeframefordecisionmaking.Adjusttheneededinformationand
analysistoreflecttheallottedtimeforreachingadecision.
5.3
4.5.3.
5.3
4.5.4.
Neverdelayadecisionbecauseyouarenotwillingtotaketheresponsibilityorareafraidtodiscussthe
underlyingissues.
5.3
4.5.5.
Breakdowncomplexdecisionsintoindependentcomponentsasmuchaspossible.Donotbargainfor
powerorstatus,butresolveeachbasedonprogramandsystemrequirementsandconstraints.
5.3
4.5.6.
Ifyoucannotmakeadecisionforwhateverreason,keeptrackofitandperiodicallyreviewunmade
decisions.
5.3
4.5.7.
Defineaclear,streamlinedprocessforcriticaldecisionmaking,resolvingconflictsofinterestand
convergingonconsensus.
5.3
4.5.8.
5.3
4.5.9.
Makedecisionscarefullybyconsensus,maintainingclearresponsibilityandthoroughlyconsideringall
options.Searchforsolutionstoissuesthatsatisfymultiplestakeholderssimultaneously.Stakeholder
interestsmustconvergeovertime.
181
SE
Process #
LE #
5.3
6.5.
Usechangemanagementeffectivelytocontinuallyandproactivelyaligntheprogramwithunexpected
changesintheprogramsconductandtheenvironment.
5.3
6.5.2.
Establishaprogramchangemanagementprocessatthetoplevelthatincorporatesallrelevant
stakeholdersandprogramcomponents.
5.3
6.7.3.
5.4
RiskManagementProcess
5.4
3.10.2.
Instituteclearguidelinesfortechnologymaturationandinsertionprocessinyourprogram.Clearlydefine
whattypeandleveloftechnology,cost,andscheduleriskisacceptableunderwhatcircumstances
(paralysisbyanalysisvs.programfailure).
5.4
3.10.3.
5.4
3.10.5.
Extensivelyuseriskmanagementtoacceptappropriatelevelsoftechnologyriskandensuresufficient
mitigationactionsareinplace.
5.4
3.5.11.
downstreamproblems.
5.4
3.5.12.
Includeadetailedriskandopportunityidentification,assessmentandmitigationintheearlyprogram
planningphases.
5.4
6.6.
5.4
6.6.1.
5.4
6.6.10.
5.4
6.6.2.
Createtransparencyregardingtheuncertaintiesaffectingtheprogram.Understandanddocumentthekey
riskfactorsforprogramsandexistingbestpracticestomanagethem.
5.4
6.6.3.
5.4
6.6.4.
Reduceprograminternaluncertaintiesandotheruncertaintiesthatcanbeinfluencedtoamaximum
degree.
5.4
6.6.5.
5.4
6.6.6.
5.4
6.6.7.
Tailortheriskmanagementprocesstothespecificprogramneedsandintegrateitwiththeoverall
programmanagementprocess.
5.4
6.6.8.
Ensurethatriskmanagementactivitiescontributetocontinuousimprovementofprogrammanagement
processesandtheorganizationoftheprogramenterprise.
5.4
6.6.9.
5.5
ConfigurationManagementProcess
5.5
6.7.7.
Publishinstructionsforartifactcontentanddatastorage,centralcaptureversuslocalstorage,andfor
paperversuselectronic,balancingbetweenexcessivebureaucracyandtheneedfortraceability.
5.6
InformationManagementProcess
5.6
3.8.3.
5.6
3.8.4.
Usemetricsstructuredtomotivatetherightbehavior.Beverycarefultoavoidtheunintended
consequencesthatcomefromthewrongmetricsincentivizingundesirablebehavior.
5.6
3.8.5.
5.6
4.10.
5.6
4.10.1.
5.6
4.10.10.
5.6
4.10.11.
5.6
4.10.2.
182
SE
Process #
LE #
5.6
4.10.7.
5.6
4.10.8.
Establishclearlineofsightbetweenlowerlevelprogramandprojectmetricsandtoplevelprogram
successmetrics.
5.6
4.10.9.
Developasnapshot/summaryrepresentationofthemeaningfulmetrics(e.g.,standarddeck)tomeasure
allphasesoftheprojectandprogramandmakeitavailabletoall.
5.6
4.8.1.
5.6
4.9.10.
AvoidexcessivelycomplexandoverlyfeaturerichITtools.Tailortoolstoprogramneeds,nottheother
wayaround.
5.6
4.9.7.
5.6
4.9.8.
5.6
4.9.9.
5.6
6.7.10.
andaknowledgemanagementstrategytoenablethesharingofdataandinformationwithinthe
enterprise.
5.6
6.7.9.
5.7
MeasurementProcess
5.7
3.8.
5.7
3.8.1.
5.7
3.8.2.
6.
SystemsEngineering:AgreementProcesses
6.1
AcquisitionProcess
6.1
2.4.
processbegins.
6.1
2.4.1.
Enssurethatthecustomerlevelrequirementsdefinedintherequestforproposal(RFP)orcontractsare
trulyrepresentativeoftheneed,stable,complete,crystalclear,deconflicted,freeofwasteful
specifications,andassimpleaspossible.
6.1
2.4.10.
Requireanindependentmandatoryreviewoftheprogramrequirements,conceptofoperation,andother
relevantspecificationsofvalueforclarity,lackofambiguity,lackofconflicts,stability,completeness,and
generalreadinessforcontractingandeffectiveprogramexecution.
6.1
2.4.11.
Clearlyarticulatethetoplevelobjectives,value,programbenefits,andfunctionalrequirementsbefore
formalrequirementsorarequestforproposalisissued.
6.1
2.4.12.
Useacleardecisiongatethatreviewsthematurityofrequirements,thetradeoffsbetweentoplevel
objectives,aswellasthelevelofremainingrequirementsrisksbeforedetailedformalrequirementsora
requestforproposalisissued.
6.1
2.4.2.
Useonlyhighlyexperiencedpeopleandexpertinstitutionstowriteprogramrequirements,RFPsand
contracts.
6.1
2.4.3.
Ifthecustomerlackstheexpertisetodevelopclearrequirements,issueacontracttoaproxyorganization
withtoweringexperienceandexpertisetosortoutandmaturetherequirementsandspecificationsinthe
RFP.Thisproxymustremainaccountableforthequalityoftherequirements,includingpersonal
accountability.
6.1
2.4.4.
Preventcarelessinsertionofmutuallycompetingandconflictingrequirements,excessivenumberof
requirements,standards,andrulestobefollowedintheprogram,mindless"cutandpaste"of
requirementsfrompreviousprograms.
6.1
2.4.5.
Minimizethetotalnumberofrequirements.Includeonlythosethatareneededtocreatevaluetothe
6.1
2.4.6.
Insistthatasinglepersonisinchargeoftheentireprogramrequirementstoassureconsistencyand
efficiencythroughout.
183
SE
Process #
LE #
6.1
2.4.7.
demonstrated.
6.1
2.4.8.
Alwaysclearlylinkrequirementstospecificcustomerstakeholderneedsandtracerequirementsfromthis
topleveltobottomlevel.
6.1
2.4.9.
6.1
2.6.
6.1
2.6.1.
Strivetominimizeandstreamlinetheburdenofpaperworkforexternalstakeholdersbyactivelyengaging
themintheprocessandclearlyarticulatingandaligningthebenefitgeneratedbyeachreport.
6.1
3.10.
6.1
3.10.1.
Createtransparencyregardingthetechnologyrisksandassociatedcostandschedulerisksbeforelarge
scaleprogramsarecontracted.Issuesmallcontractstomaturecriticaltechnologiesbeforestartingalarge
scaleprogram.
6.1
3.10.11.
Utilizeindependenttechnicalreviewstoconfirmacapabilitytodeliverandintegrateanynewtechnology
thatcoulddelaytheprogramorcausescheduleoverruns.
6.1
3.10.4.
Utilizeprogrammanagementstrategiesthatproducethebestbalancebetweentechnologyriskand
rewardinyourprogram,suchasevolutionaryacquisitionandincrementalorspiraldevelopment.
6.1
3.10.6.
systems.
6.1
3.10.7.
Providestablefundingfortechnologydevelopmentandmaturation.Thiswillsupportasteady,planned
pipelineofnewtechnologiestobeinsertedintotheprogram.
6.1
3.10.8.
Matchtechnologiestoprogramrequirements.Donotexceedprogramneedsbyusingunnecessarily
exquisitetechnologies("goldplating").
6.1
3.4.
6.1
3.4.1.
Ensurestrongcorporate,institutional,andpersonalaccountabilityandpersonalpenaltiesfor"lowballing"
ofthebudget,schedule,andriskandoverestimatingcapabilities(e.g.,thetechnologyreadinesslevels
(TRL))inordertowinthecontract.
6.1
3.4.2.
Ifalowballingisdetectedonafixedpricecontract,insistoncontinuingthefixedpricecontract,or
terminatetheprogram,andrebid.Donotallowswitchingtocostpluscontracts.
6.1
3.4.3.
Ensurethatplannersandcostestimatorsareheldresponsiblefortheirestimatesduringtheexecutionof
theprogram.Minimizetheriskofwishfulthinking.
6.1
5.2.
6.1
5.2.1.
6.1
5.2.2.
Aligncontractsandincentivesthroughouttheprogramtofairlysharetheriskandopportunitiesinherentin
theprobabilisticestimates.Usethistoavoidgamingofforecastsandcreatewinwinsituations.
6.2
SupplyProcess
6.2
1.1.8.
Promoteclosecollaborationandrelationshipbetweeninternalcustomersandsuppliers.Donotallowlone
wolfbehavior."
6.2
3.7.
6.2
3.7.1.
Permitoutsourcingandsubcontractingonlyforprogramelementsthatareperfectlydefinedandstable.
Donotsubcontractearlyprogramphaseswhentheneedforclosecoordinationisthestrongest.
6.2
3.7.10.
6.2
3.7.11.
InvitesuppliersastrustedprogrampartnerstomakeaseriouscontributiontoSE,design,and
development.
6.2
3.7.12.
frameworkofrules,butwatchforhighriskitems,whichmustbehandledatthetoplevel.
184
SE
Process #
LE #
6.2
3.7.2.
Havethesuppliersbrieftheprogrammanagementteamoncurrentandfuturecapabilitiesduring
conceptualprogramphases.
6.2
3.7.3.
6.2
3.7.4.
6.2
3.7.5.
Streamlinesupplychainprocessesandfocusonjustintimeoperationsthatminimizeinventorycarrying
costs.
6.2
3.7.6.
Whendefiningrequirementsetsformultiplesuppliers,ensurethattheyareindependentofeachother,in
ordertominimizeriskandreducetheneedtomanagedependenciesamongsuppliers.
6.2
3.7.7.
proceduresandexpectationsforacceptancetests,andensuretherequirementsarestable.
6.2
3.7.8.
6.2
3.7.9.
6.2
6.4.7.
7.
SystemsEngineering:OrganizationalProjectEnablingProcesses
7.1
LifeCycleModelManagementProcess
7.1
4.2.6.
Developaprocesstoensurethetimelyandflawlesscoordination,interface,andhandoff(ifneeded)of
RAAamongrelevantprogramstakeholdersandexecutionteamsthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.
7.3
ProjectPortfolioManagementProcess
7.3
3.1.2.
Promotereuseandsharingofprogramassets.Utilizestandards,standardprocesses,modulesof
knowledge,technicalstandardization.andplatforms,andsoftwarelibraries.
7.3
3.2.4.
Developaclearvisionandholisticviewofthefuturestateoftheprogramenterprise,includingfuture
portfolioofproducts,includingboththefutureorganizationaswellasthefuturevaluestream.Provide
guidanceonaclearpathforwardandensurethatresourcesarealignedwiththisvision.
7.4
HumanResourceManagementProcess
7.4
1.1.4.
Hirepeoplebasedonpassionand"sparkintheeye"andbroadprofessionalknowledge,notonlybasedon
veryspecificskillneeds(hirefortalent,trainforskills).Donotdelegatethiscriticaltasktocomputers
7.4
1.1.5.
7.4
1.4.
7.4
1.4.2.
7.4
1.4.3.
7.4
1.4.4.
7.4
1.4.5.
7.4
1.4.7.
Perpetuateprofessionalexcellencethroughmentoring,friendlypeerreview,training,continuing
education,andothermeans.
7.4
1.5.1.
7.4
4.2.1.
Nominateapermanent,experiencedprogrammanagerfullyresponsibleandaccountableforsuccessof
theentireprogramlifecycle,withcompleteauthorityoverallaspectsoftheprogram(businessand
technical).
7.4
4.2.2.
7.4
4.4.1.
7.4
4.4.2.
Investheavilyinskillsandintellectualcapital;engagepeoplewithdeepknowledgeoftheproductand
technology.
7.4
6.7.5.
185
SE
Process #
LE #
7.5
QualityManagementProcess
7.5
4.8.
collaboration.
7.5
6.3.1.
7.5
6.3.7.
culture.
7.5
6.3.8.
Pursuerefinementandexcellenceonlyifitcreatesadditionalvalueandbenefits.Avoidoverproduction
andoverprocessingofwaste.Ensurethattheprocesscanbeexecuted"rightthefirsttime"fromthenon.
7.5
6.4.
7.5
6.4.2.
7.5
6.4.3.
implementation.
7.5
6.4.4.
Assignresponsibilityandaccountabilityforreviewing,evaluating,andstandardizinglessonslearnedand
implementresultingchange.
7.5
6.4.5.
training.
7.5
6.8.
stakeholders.
7.5
6.8.1.
7.5
6.8.2.
Usequickresponsesmallteamscomprisedofprogramstakeholdersforlocalproblemsanddevelopment
ofstandards.
7.5
6.8.3.
7.5
6.8.4.
8.1
SystemsEngineering:TailoringProcess
8.1
2.6.2.
Minimizeandstreamlinetheprograminternalreportingforprogramactivitiesandsubprojectsby
optimizingtheinternalreportingrequirements.Onlyrequirereportsthatareclearlynecessaryandalign
reportingrequirementstoreduceredundantreporting.
8.1
2.6.3.
8.1
3.1.4.
8.1
5.1.
8.1
6.1.4.
EPP
SystemsEngineering:EnterprisePlanningandPreparation
EPP
1.4.1.
EPP
1.5.5.
Developstandardspayingattentiontohumanfactors,includinglevelofexperienceandperception
abilities.
EPP
1.6.4.
EPP
3.2.7.
Leadandsustainthetransformationtoanintegratedprogrammanagementandsystemsengineering
enterpriseacrosscustomerandsupplierorganizations.
EPP
4.2.3.
EPP
4.3.
EPP
4.3.1.
186
SE
Process #
LE #
EPP
4.3.2.
management,andengineeringexperience;leadershipandpeopleskills;andexperienceworkingonhighly
EPP
4.3.3.
Ensurethatthecompetency,technicalknowledge,andotherrelevantdomainknowledgeoftheprogram
managerandtheotherkeymembersoftheprogramteamareonparwiththetechnicalcomplexityofthe
program.
EPP
4.3.4.
Ensurethattheprogrammanagerhasclarityovertheimpactoftechnical,requirement,andscopechanges
(forexamplebycleartraceabilityofrequirementsandeffectiveuseofchangemanagementcontrol
boards).
EPP
4.4.
highlyeffective.
EPP
4.8.2.
EPP
4.8.3.
andplatforms.
EPP
4.8.4.
EPP
6.2.1.
Developanintegrated,longtermapproachtoimplementLeanmanagementpracticesinproductportfolio
planningandtheentireenterprise.
EPP
6.2.2.
SetupacentralizedLeanmanagementfunctionthatdevelopsageneralLeanmanagementprocess
frameworkfortheenterprise,acentralrepositoryofLeanmanagementmethodsandaLeanbusinesscase
thattiesLeanpracticestoachievingtheprogrambenefits.
EPP
6.2.3.
SetupaLeanmanagementtraininginfrastructure;midlevelandprojectmanagersmusttrainand
motivatetheirteams.
ALL
SystemsEngineering:AllSystemsEngineeringProcesses
ALL
1.1.
ALL
1.1.1.
ALL
1.1.10.
ALL
1.1.3.
Programleadershipmustbeamentorandprovideamodelfordesiredbehaviorintheentireprogram
team,suchastrust,respect,honesty,empowerment,teamwork,stability,motivation,anddrivefor
excellence.
ALL
1.1.6.
ALL
1.1.7.
ALL
1.2.
ALL
1.2.1.
ALL
1.2.2.
ALL
1.3.
ALL
1.3.2.
ALL
1.3.3.
Allowcertainamountof"failure"inacontrolledenvironmentatlowerlevels,sopeoplecantakeriskand
growbyexperience.
ALL
1.3.4.
ALL
1.3.5.
ALL
1.4.6.
Establishahighlyexperiencedcoregroup("grayhairs")thatleadsbyexampleandinstitutionalizespositive
behavior.
ALL
1.5.
ALL
1.5.2.
187
SE
Process #
LE #
ALL
1.5.3.
appreciation.
ALL
1.5.6.
ALL
1.6.
ALL
1.6.3.
ALL
1.6.5.
ALL
1.6.6.
Supportthedevelopmentofinformalandsocialnetworkswithintheprogramandtokeystakeholdersin
theprogramenvironment.
ALL
1.6.7.
ALL
2.3.
ALL
2.3.1.
Everyoneinvolvedintheprogrammusthaveacustomerfirstspirit,focusingontheclearlydefined
programvalueandrequirements.
ALL
2.3.2.
ALL
2.3.7.
ALL
2.3.8.
Buildtrustandhealthyrelationshipswithstakeholdersbyestablishingopencommunicationandearly
engagementwiththeprogramplanningandexecution.
ALL
2.3.9.
ALL
2.5.2.
requirementscreep.
ALL
2.5.5.
ALL
3.10.10.
ALL
3.5.6.
Propagatefrontloadingoftheprogramthroughoutcriticalsubprojectswithsimilarworkshopstothose
describedin3.5.5.
ALL
3.5.9.
Forallcriticalactivities,definewhoisresponsible,approving,supporting,andinforming(alsoknownas
RACImatrix),usingastandardizedtool,payingattentiontoprecedenceoftasksanddocumenting
handoffs.
ALL
4.10.3.
ALL
4.10.4.
ALL
4.10.5.
ALL
4.10.6.
Provideguidancetotheorganizationandsubprojectstoassesstheirlevelofperformanceandcontribution
totheoverallprogramsuccess.
ALL
4.2.
ALL
4.2.4.
Holdpeopleresponsiblefortheircontributionsthroughouttheprogramlifecycle.Upstreamactivities
mustbeheldresponsibleforissuestheycauseindownstreamactivities.
ALL
4.2.5.
Inthetoplevelprogrammanagementteamanddecisionmaking,thedifferentroles(e.g.,businessand
technical)mustexhibitahighlevelofteamwork,understandingandappreciationofthenecessitiesineach
other'sdomain.
ALL
4.6.6.
ALL
4.7.
Useefficientandeffectivecommunicationandcoordinationwiththeprogramteam.
ALL
4.7.1.
ALL
4.7.3.
communicationandcoordinationamongdifferentpartsoftheenterpriseandwithsuppliers.
188
SE
Process #
LE #
ALL
4.7.4.
ALL
4.7.5.
ALL
4.7.6.
ALL
4.8.5.
ALL
4.9.
ALL
4.9.1.
everythingwithmultiplewhys;(b.)Alignprocessflowtodecisionflow;(c.)Resolveallissuesasthey
occurinfrequentintegrativeevents;and(d.)Discusstradeoffsandoptions.
ALL
4.9.2.
Bewillingtochallengethecustomer'sassumptionsontechnicalandmeritocraticgroundsandtomaximize
ALL
4.9.3.
ALL
4.9.4.
Optimizehumanresourceswhenallocatingvalueadded(VA)andrequired,nonvalueadded(RNVA)tasks:
(a.)Useprofessionalstodovalueaddingprofessionalwork;(b.)Whenprofessionalsarenotabsolutely
required,usenonprofessionals(supportstaff)todorequired,nonvalueaddingtasks
ALL
4.9.5.
ALL
5.1.1.
ALL
5.1.2.
genuineusersonly.
ALL
5.1.3.
Traintheteamtorecognizewhotheinternalcustomer(receiver)isforeverytaskaswellasthesupplier
(giver)toeachtaskuseaSIPOC(supplier,inputs,process,outputs,customer)modeltobetter
understandthevaluestream.
ALL
5.1.4.
ALL
5.1.5.
Promoteeffective,realtimedirectcommunicationbetweeneachgiverandreceiverinthevalueflow,
basedonmutualtrustandrespect,andensurebothunderstandtheirmutualneedsandexpectations.
ALL
5.1.6.
ALL
5.1.7.
ALL
5.2.3.
ALL
6.2.
ALL
6.2.4.
ALL
6.2.5.
improvementapproachinordertoassuresustainabilityoftheimprovements,aswellasusesynergieswith
existingprocessimprovementactivities.
ALL
6.2.6.
ALL
6.2.7.
ALL
6.2.8.
ALL
6.3.
ALL
6.3.2.
Followbasicproblemsolvingtechniques(e.g.,plandocheckact)andadoptacultureofstoppingand
permanentlyfixingproblemswhentheyoccur.
ALL
6.3.3.
ALL
6.3.4.
ALL
6.3.5.
Treatanyimperfectionasanopportunityforimmediateimprovementandlessontobelearned,and
practicefrequentreviewsoflessonslearned.
ALL
6.3.6.
189
SE
Process #
LE #
ALL
6.4.1.
ALL
6.4.6.
ALL
6.7.
ALL
6.7.2.
communication,ratherthanverboseunstructuredmemos.Keepunderlyingdataasbackupincaseitis
A.5.4 MappingtoLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering(LEfSE)
ThefollowingtablecontainsthemappingoftheLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering(LEfSE,seeSection1.6)
againsttheLeanEnablersforProgramManagement.AbouthalfoftheLeanEnablersforProgramManagement
wereadaptedfromtheLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering(TableA20A20).Thesecondhalfarenew
Enablers(TableA21A21).
TableA20:MappingofLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineeringagainstLeanEnablersforManagingEngineeringPrograms
# LEfSE
# LE
1.
2
1.2.
2.1.
1.2.1.
2.1.1.
Definevalueastheoutcomeofanactivitythatsatisfiesatleastthreeconditions:(a.)Theexternal
customerstakeholdersarewillingtopayforvalue;(b.)Transformsinformationormaterialorreduces
uncertainty;(c.)Providesspecifiedprogrambenefitsrightthefirsttime.
1.2.2.
2.1.2.
1.2.3.
2.1.3.
clarity.
1.2.4.
2.5.1.
1.2.5.
2.1.4.
1.2.6.
2.1.5.
1.3.
2.3.
1.3.1.
2.3.1.
Everyoneinvolvedintheprogrammusthaveacustomerfirstspirit,focusingontheclearlydefined
programvalueandrequirements.
1.3.2.
2.3.2.
1.3.3.
2.3.3.
1.3.4.
2.3.4.
2.
3
2.2.
3.1.
2.2.1.
3.11.1.
Developandexecuteaclearcommunicationplanthatcoverstheentirevaluestreamandstakeholders.
2.2.10.
3.5.9.
Forallcriticalactivities,definewhoisresponsibleforapproving,supporting,andinforming(alsoknownas
RACImatrix),usingastandardizedtool,payingattentiontoprecedenceoftasks,anddocumenting
handoffs.
2.2.11.
3.9.5.
Planforlevelworkflowandwithprecisiontoenablescheduleadherenceanddriveoutarrivaltime
variation.
2.2.12.
3.9.4.
flexibilityinworkloading,thatis,haveappropriatecontingenciesandschedulebuffers.
190
# LEfSE
# LE
2.2.13.
3.11.2.
requirements,etc.
2.2.2.
3.1.3.
Havecrossfunctionalstakeholdersandprogramleadershipworktogethertobuildtheagreedvalue
stream.
2.2.3.
3.9.1.
Createaplantoappropriatelyintegrateandalignprogrammanagement,systemsengineeringandother
2.2.4.
4.4.3.
2.2.5.
3.1.4.
2.2.6.
2.4.1.
Ensurethatthecustomerlevelrequirementsdefinedintherequestforproposal(RFP)orcontractsare
trulyrepresentativeoftheneed,stable,complete,crystalclear,deconflicted,freeofwasteful
specifications,andassimpleaspossible.
2.2.7.
3.9.6.
withwhatdataandwhen),understandingtaskdependenciesandparentchildrelationships.
2.2.8.
3.9.2.
2.2.9.
3.9.3.
Synchronizeworkflowactivitiesusingschedulingacrossfunctions,andevenmoredetailedscheduling
withinfunctions.
2.3
3.5.
2.3.1.
3.3.1.
Plantoutilizecrossfunctionalteamsmadeupofthemostexperiencedandcompatiblepeopleatthe
startoftheprojecttolookatabroadrangeofsolutionsets.
2.3.2.
3.3.2.
2.3.3.
3.5.11.
downstreamproblems.
2.3.4.
3.5.1.
behaviorinlater"crisis"situations.
2.4.
3.1.1.
2.4.1.
3.1.2.
Promotereuseandsharingofprogramassets.Utilizestandards,standardprocesses,modulesof
knowledge,technicalstandardizationandplatforms,andsoftwarelibraries.
2.4.2.
3.10.3.
2.4.3.
3.10.6.
systems.
2.4.4.
3.10.1.
Createtransparencyregardingthetechnologyrisksandassociatedcostandschedulerisksbeforelarge
scaleprogramsarecontracted.Issuesmallcontractstomaturecriticaltechnologiesbeforeastartinglarge
scaleprogram.
2.4.5.
3.10.4.
Utilizeprogrammanagementstrategiesthatproducethebestbalancebetweentechnologyriskand
rewardintheprogram,suchasevolutionaryacquisitionandincrementalorspiraldevelopment.
2.5.
3.7.
2.5.1.
3.7.8.
2.5.2.
3.7.9.
2.5.3.
3.7.10.
Includeandmanagethemajorsuppliersasapartoftheteam.
2.5.4.
3.7.2.
Havethesuppliersbrieftheprogrammanagementteamoncurrentandfuturecapabilitiesduring
conceptualprogramphases.
2.6.
3.8.
2.6.1.
3.8.1.
191
# LEfSE
# LE
2.6.2.
3.8.2.
2.6.3.
3.8.3.
2.6.4.
3.8.4.
Usemetricsstructuredtomotivatetherightbehavior.Beverycarefultoavoidtheunintended
consequencesthatcomefromthewrongmetricsincentivizingundesirablebehavior.
2.6.5.
3.8.5.
3.
4
3.2.
2.5.
Clarify,derive,andprioritizerequirementsearly,often,andproactively.
3.2.1.
2.5.2.
understandingandagreement.Keeptherecordsinwriting,sharethediscusseditemsanddonotallow
requirementscreep.
3.2.2
2.5.6.
Activelypromotethematurationofstakeholderrequirements,forexample,byprovidingdetailedtradeoff
studies,feasibilitystudies,andvirtualprototypes.
3.2.2.
2.5.8.
Createeffectivechannelsforclarificationofrequirements(e.g.,involvingcustomerstakeholdersin
programteams).
3.2.3.
2.5.3.
Usearchitecturalmethodsandmodelingtocreateastandardprogramsystemrepresentation(3D
integratedCAEtoolset,mockups,prototypes,models,simulations,andsoftwaredesigntools)thatallow
interactionswithcustomersandotherstakeholdersasthebestmeansofdrawingoutrequirements.
3.2.4.
2.5.4.
3.2.5.
2.5.6.
Activelypromotethematurationofstakeholderrequirements,forexample,byprovidingdetailedtradeoff
studies,feasibilitystudies,andvirtualprototypes.
3.2.5.
2.5.9.
modelsorspiraldevelopment).
3.2.6.
2.5.5.
3.3.
3.5.
3.3.1.
3.3.4.
3.3.2.
3.3.5.
3.3.3.
3.2.5.
Useacleararchitecturaldescriptionoftheagreedsolutiontoplanacoherentprogram,engineering,and
3.3.4.
3.3.6.
3.3.5.
3.7.11.
InvitesuppliersastrustedprogrampartnerstomakeaseriouscontributiontoSE,design,and
development.
3.4.
4.1.
3.4.1.
4.1.1.
3.4.2.
4.1.1.
3.4.3.
4.1.2.
proposalphases.
3.4.4.
4.1.2.
proposalphases.
3.5.
4.7.
3.5.1.
4.7.1.
3.5.2.
4.7.2.
3.5.3.
4.7.3.
3.5.4.
4.7.4.
192
# LEfSE
# LE
3.5.5.
4.7.6.
3.5.6.
6.7.2.
communication,ratherthanverbose,unstructuredmemos.Keepunderlyingdataasbackupincaseitis
3.5.7.
6.7.3.
3.5.8.
3.7.7.
proceduresandexpectationsforacceptancetests;andensuretherequirementsarestable.
3.5.9.
3.7.12.
frameworkofrules,butwatchforhighriskitemswhichmustbehandledatthetoplevel.
3.6
4.9.
3.6.1.
4.9.1.
everythingwithmultiplewhys;(b.)Alignprocessflowtodecisionflow;(c.)Resolveallissuesasthey
occurinfrequentintegrativeevents;and(d.)Discusstradeoffsandoptions.
3.6.2.
4.9.2.
Bewillingtochallengethecustomer'sassumptionsontechnicalandmeritocraticgrounds,andtomaximize
3.6.3.
4.9.3.
3.6.4.
4.9.4.
Optimizehumanresourceswhenallocatingvalueadded(VA)andrequired,nonvalueadded(RNVA)tasks:
(a.)Useprofessionalstodovalueaddingprofessionalwork;and(b.)Whenprofessionalsarenotabsolutely
required,usenonprofessionals(supportstaff)todorequired,nonvalueaddiedtasks.
3.6.5.
4.9.5.
3.6.6.
5.1.5.
3.7.
4.10.
3.7.1.
4.10.1.
3.7.2.
4.10.3.
3.7.3.
4.10.4.
3.7.4.
4.10.5.
3.8.
4.9.
3.8.1.
4.9.6.
3.8.2.
4.9.7.
3.8.3.
4.9.8.
3.8.4.
4.9.9.
3.8.5.
4.9.10.
AvoidexcessivelycomplexandoverlyfeaturerichITtools.Tailortoolstoprogramneeds,nottheother
wayaround.
4.
5
4.2.
5.1.
4.2.1.
5.1.1.
4.2.2.
5.1.2.
genuineusersonly.
4.2.3.
3.1.
4.2.4.
5.1.3.
Traintheteamtorecognizewhotheinternalcustomer(receiver)isforeverytaskaswellasthesupplier
(giver)toeachtaskuseaSIPOC(supplier,inputs,process,outputs,customer)modeltobetter
understandthevaluestream.
193
# LEfSE
# LE
4.2.5.
5.1.4.
4.2.6.
5.1.6.
4.2.7.
5.1.5.
4.2.8
5.1.5.
basedonmutualtrustandrespect,andensurebothunderstandtheirmutualneedsandexpectations
4.2.9.
5.1.7.
5.
6
5.2.
6.3.
5.2.1.
6.3.1.
5.2.2.
6.3.3.
5.2.3.
6.3.4.
5.2.4.
6.3.5.
Treatanyimperfectionasanopportunityforimmediateimprovementandlessontobelearned,and
practicefrequentreviewsoflessonslearned.
5.2.5.
6.3.6.
5.2.6.
6.3.7.
culture.
5.2.7.
6.3.8.
Pursuerefinementandexcellenceonlyifitcreatesadditionalvalueandbenefits.Avoidoverproduction
andoverprocessingofwaste.Ensurethattheprocesscanbeexecuted"rightthefirsttime"fromthenon.
5.2.8.
6.3.9.
5.3
6.4.
5.3.1.
6.4.
5.3.2.
6.4.1.
5.3.3.
6.4.5.
training.
5.3.4.
6.4.6.
5.3.5.
6.4.7.
5.4.
6.7.
5.4.1.
6.7.1.
Developageneralprogrampolicy/guideline/frameworkthatoutlinesexpectationsregarding
communication,coordination,andcollaboration.
5.4.2.
6.7.5.
5.4.3.
6.7.4.
5.4.4.
6.7.6.
5.4.5.
6.7.7.
Publishinstructionsforartifactcontentanddatastorage,centralcaptureversuslocalstorage,andfor
paperversuselectronic,balancingbetweenexcessivebureaucracyandtheneedfortraceability.
5.4.6.
6.7.8.
Publishadirectoryandorganizationchartoftheentireprogramteamandprovidetrainingtonewhireson
howtolocatetheneedednodesofknowledge.
5.4.7.
6.7.9.
5.4.8.
6.7.10.
andaknowledgemanagementstrategytoenablethesharingofdataandinformationwithinthe
enterprise.
5.5.
4.3.
194
# LEfSE
# LE
5.5.1.
4.2.3.
5.5.2.
1.6.8.
customers,superiors,programemployees,andkeycontractors/suppliers.
5.5.3.
4.3.2.
managementandengineeringexperience;leadershipandpeopleskills;andexperienceworkingonhighly
5.5.4.
4.3.1.
5.5.5.
4.4.3.
5.6.
4.8.
collaboration.
5.6.1.
4.8.3.
andplatforms.
5.6.2.
4.8.4.
5.6.3.
4.8.5.
5.7.
6.8.
stakeholders.
5.7.1.
6.8.1.
5.7.2.
6.8.2.
Usequickresponsesmallteamscomprisedofprogramstakeholdersforlocalproblemsanddevelopment
ofstandards.
5.7.3.
6.8.3.
6.
1
6.2.
1.1.
6.2.1.
1.2.1.
Createasharedvisionthatdrawsoutandinspiresthebestinpeople.
6.2.10.
1.3.5.
6.2.11.
1.1.6.
6.2.12.
1.3.4.
6.2.13.
1.1.7.
6.2.14.
1.6.1.
6.2.2.
1.1.2.
Investinpeopleselectionanddevelopmenttoaddressenterpriseandprogramexcellence.Ensurethat
6.2.3.
1.1.3.
Programleadershipmustbeamentorandprovideamodelfordesiredbehaviorintheentireprogram
team,suchastrust,respect,honesty,empowerment,teamwork,stability,motivation,anddrivefor
excellence.
6.2.4.
1.1.4.
Hirepeoplebasedonpassionand"sparkintheeye"andbroadprofessionalknowledge,notonlybasedon
veryspecificskillneeds(hirefortalent,trainforskills).Donotdelegatethiscriticaltasktocomputers
6.2.5.
1.6.3.
6.2.6.
1.4.5.
6.2.7.
1.1.5.
6.2.8.
1.3.1.
195
# LEfSE
# LE
6.2.9.
1.3.2.
6.3
1.4.
6.3.1.
1.4.1.
6.3.2.
1.4.2.
6.3.3.
1.4.3.
6.3.4.
1.4.4.
6.4.
1.4.
6.4.1.
1.4.7.
Perpetuateprofessionalexcellencethroughmentoring,friendlypeerreview,training,continuing
education,andothermeans.
6.4.2.
1.5.1.
6.4.3.
1.5.2.
6.4.4.
1.5.
6.4.5.
1.5.3.
appreciation.
6.4.6.
1.5.4.
6.4.7.
1.5.5.
Developstandardspayingattentiontohumanfactors,includinglevelofexperienceandperception
abilities.
6.4.8.
1.5.6.
6.5.
1.1.1.
TableA21:NewLeanEnablersnotRelatedtoLeanEnablersforSystemsEngineering
# LE
Lean Enablers for Managing Engineering Programs
1.1.8.
behavior."
1.1.9.
1.1.10.
1.2.
1.2.2.
1.3.
1.3.3.
experience.
1.4.6.
1.6.
1.6.2.
1.6.4.
1.6.5.
1.6.6.
programenvironment.
1.6.7.
2.2.
2.2.1.
196
# LE
2.2.2.
Alignprogramresourcestoachieveplannedbenefitsandincorporateactivitiesthatwillenablethebenefitsachieved
tobesustainedfollowingthecloseoftheprogram.
2.2.3.
organizationalgoals(e.g.,competitivenessandprofitability)
2.3.10.
2.3.11.
Useprogramcomponentselectionandreviewwiththekeystakeholdersasanopportunitytocontinuouslyfocusthe
programonbenefitsdelivery.
2.3.5.
2.3.6.
2.3.7.
2.3.8.
2.3.9.
2.4.
Develophighqualityprogramrequirementsamongcustomerstakeholdersbeforebiddingandexecutionprocess
begins.
2.4.10.
2.4.11.
Clearlyarticulatethetoplevelobjectives,value,programbenefits,andfunctionalrequirementsbeforeformal
2.4.12.
Useacleardecisiongatethatreviewsthematurityofrequirements,thetradeoffsbetweentoplevelobjectives,as
wellasthelevelofremainingrequirementsrisksbeforedetailedformalrequirementsorarequestforproposalis
issued.
2.4.2.
Useonlyhighlyexperiencedpeopleandexpertinstitutionstowriteprogramrequirements,RFPs,andcontracts.
2.4.3.
toweringexperienceandexpertisetosortoutandmaturetherequirementsandspecificationsintheRFP.Thisproxy
mustremainaccountableforthequalityoftherequirements,includingpersonalaccountability.
2.4.4.
programs.
2.4.5.
stakeholders.
2.4.6.
throughout.
2.4.7.
demonstrated.
2.4.8.
Alwaysclearlylinkrequirementstospecificcustomerstakeholderneedsandtracerequirementsfromthistoplevel
tobottomlevel
2.4.9.
2.5.10.
Employagilemethodstomanagenecessaryrequirementschangeandmaketheprogramdeliverablesrobustagainst
thosechanges.Makebothprogramprocessesandprogramdeliverablesreusable,reconfigurable,andscalable.
2.5.7.
2.6.
2.6.1.
Strivetominimizeandstreamlinetheburdenofpaperworkforexternalstakeholdersbyactivelyengagingthemin
theprocessandclearlyarticulatingandaligningthebenefitgeneratedbyeachreport.
197
# LE
2.6.2.
internalreportingrequirements.Onlyrequirereportsthatareclearlynecessary,andalignreportingrequirementsto
2.6.3.
3.10.
3.10.10.
3.10.11.
3.10.2.
programfailure).
3.10.5.
actionsareinplace.
3.10.7.
3.10.8.
3.10.9.
3.11.
3.2.
3.2.1.
Keepactivitiesduringearlyprogramphasesinternalandcollocated,asthereisahighneedforcoordination.
3.2.2.
Setupasingle,collocatedorganizationtohandletheentiresystemsengineeringandarchitectingfortheentire
3.2.3.
3.2.4.
Developaclearvisionandholisticviewofthefuturestateofyourprogramenterprise,includingfutureportfolioof
products,includingboththefutureorganizationaswellasthefuturevaluestream.Provideguidanceonaclearpath
3.2.6.
stakeholders.
3.2.7.
3.2.8.
3.3.
3.3.3.
3.4.
3.4.1.
Ensurestrongcorporate,institutional,andpersonalaccountabilityandpersonalpenaltiesfor"lowballing"ofthe
budget,schedule,andriskandoverestimatingcapabilities(e.g.,thetechnologyreadinesslevels(TRL))inordertowin
thecontract.
3.4.2.
Ifalowballingisdetectedonafixedpricecontract,insistoncontinuingthefixedpricecontract,orterminatethe
programtermination,andrebid.Donotallowswitchingtocostpluscontracts.
3.4.3.
3.5.10.
198
# LE
3.5.12.
phases.
3.5.13.
planningprocess.
3.5.14.
Theprogrammanagermustpersonallyunderstand,clarify,andremoveambiguity,conflicts,andwastefromkey
3.5.15.
3.5.2.
3.5.3.
Establishasystemandprocessthatallowscomprehensive,effective,andefficientupfrontplanningofprogram
3.5.4.
3.5.5.
3.5.6.
Propagatefrontloadingofprogramthroughoutcriticalsubprojectswithsimilarworkshopstothosedescribedin
3.5.5.
3.5.7.
Ascertainwhatisavailabletotheprogram(resources,talent,budgetandtimeline)andwhatnotavailablepriorto
3.5.8.
HoldLeanacceleratedplanningsessionsattheprogramlevelandforkeysubprojects,engagingallstakeholdersin
3.6.
3.6.1.
3.6.2.
3.7.1.
3.7.3.
3.7.4.
3.7.5.
3.7.6.
3.9.
3.9.7.
Updatedetailedplanningregularlytoreflectnewinformation,beingconsistentwiththelongtermstrategicplan.Do
notforceprogramstoexecuteagainstadetailed,outdatedplanthatwasdevelopedbasedonincomplete
information.
4.10.10.
4.10.11.
4.10.2.
4.10.6.
4.10.7.
4.10.8.
Establishclearlineofsightbetweenlowerlevelprogramandprojectmetricsandtoplevelprogramsuccessmetrics.
4.10.9.
4.2.
Ensureclearresponsibility,accountabilityandauthority(RAA)throughouttheprogramfrominitialrequirements
199
# LE
4.2.1.
4.2.2.
4.2.4.
4.2.5.
4.2.6.
4.3.3.
Ensurethatthecompetency,technicalknowledge,andotherrelevantdomainknowledgeoftheprogrammanager
4.3.4.
Ensurethattheprogrammanagerhasclarityovertheimpactoftechnical,requirement,andscopechanges(for
examplebycleartraceabilityofrequirementsandeffectiveuseofchangemanagementcontrolboards).
4.4.
effective.
4.4.1.
4.4.2.
4.5.
4.5.1.
4.5.10.
themover.
4.5.11.
process.
4.5.2.
4.5.3.
4.5.4.
issues.
4.5.5.
4.5.6.
4.5.7.
consensus.
4.5.8.
4.5.9.
overtime.
4.6.
IntegrateallprogramelementsandfunctionsthroughProgramGovernance
4.6.1.
Ensureprogramgovernancehasfullview,control,andinfluenceovertheentireprogramtoeffectivelyguideand
4.6.2.
4.6.3.
4.6.4.
Useagatedprocessforvalidating,planning,andexecutionoftheprogramandleveragefunctionalexpertiseatthese
gates.
200
# LE
4.6.5.
4.6.6.
4.7.5.
4.8.1.
4.8.2.
5.2.
5.2.1.
5.2.2.
5.2.3.
6.1.
6.1.1.
Useexistingprogrammanagementstandards,guidelines,andapplicableorganizationalmaturitymodelstoyour
6.1.2.
6.1.3.
Integratetheimplementationprocesswithexistingprogramandbusinessstrategytoanoverallprogram
6.1.4.
6.1.5.
goals,andtrackprogressontheprocessimprovementjourney.
6.2.
6.2.1.
6.2.2.
6.2.3.
teams.
6.2.4.
6.2.5.
improvementapproachinordertoassuresustainabilityoftheimprovements,aswellasusesynergieswithexisting
6.2.6.
6.2.7.
6.2.8.
6.3.2.
6.4.2.
6.4.3.
implementation.
6.4.4.
resultingchange.
6.5.
201
# LE
6.5.1.
Proactivelyaligntheprogramwithchangesintheenvironmenttokeepfocusedonachievingprogrambenefits.
Redirect,replan,orstopindividualprogramcomponents.
6.5.2.
programcomponents.
6.6.
6.6.1.
6.6.10.
6.6.2.
6.6.3.
6.6.4.
6.6.5.
6.6.6.
6.6.7.
managementprocess.
6.6.8.
6.6.9.
6.8.4.
202

Oehmen Et Al 2012 - The Guide To Lean Enablers For Managing Engineering Programs

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Oehmen Et Al 2012 - The Guide To Lean Enablers For Managing Engineering Programs

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Major Challenge Themes in Engineering Programs that

z Allenablersapply ~ Someenablersdonot apply

Engineering Program Examples

Overview of Lean Enablers

Overview of Lean Enablers

refined as a 5-week look-ahead.

A formal request was submitted to a centralized management and tracking group.

Optimizeand 2. Mapthevalue 2. Working

Agile Manifesto Principles

Supporting Lean Enabler for Managing Engineering Programs

CMMI Process Areas

Supporting Lean Enabler for Managing Engineering Programs

CMMI Process Areas

Supporting Lean Enabler for Managing Engineering Programs

CMMI Process Areas

Supporting Lean Enabler for Managing Engineering Programs

NDIA EVM Application Guide

NDIA EVM Application Guide

NDIA EVM Application Guide

Engineering Program Challenge

Engineering Program Challenge

Engineering Program Challenge

Engineering Program Challenge

Engineering Program Challenge

Enabler and Subenabler

Enabler and Subenabler

Enabler and Subenabler

Enabler and Subenabler

Enabler and Subenabler

Enabler and Subenabler

Enabler and Subenabler

Enabler and Subenabler

Enabler and Subenabler

Enabler and Subenabler

Enabler and Subenabler

Enabler and Subenabler

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 1: Reactive Program Execution (Firefighting)

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 1: Reactive Program Execution (Firefighting)

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 1: Reactive Program Execution (Firefighting)

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 1: Reactive Program Execution (Firefighting)

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 1: Reactive Program Execution (Firefighting)

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 2: Unclear Requirements

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 2: Unclear Requirements

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 2: Unclear Requirements

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 3: Insufficient Enterprise Alignment

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 3: Insufficient Enterprise Alignment

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 3: Insufficient Enterprise Alignment

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 3: Insufficient Enterprise Alignment

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 4: Process Integration

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 4: Process Integration

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 4: Process Integration

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 4: Process Integration

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 4: Process Integration

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 5: Unclear Roles and Responsibility

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 6: Culture, Competency & Skills

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 6: Culture, Competency & Skills

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 6: Culture, Competency & Skills

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 6: Culture, Competency & Skills

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 7: Insufficient Planning

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 7: Insufficient Planning

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 7: Insufficient Planning

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 8: Improper Metrics

Lean Enablers Addressing Challenge 8: Improper Metrics