Business Matters - Whitepaper
How to Improve
Your Company’s
Program Management
Effectiveness
BizTech | 800.804.4715 | 3306 Executive Parkway Suite 201 Toledo, OH 43606 | [email protected] | www.gobiztech.com
How to Improve Your Company’s Program Management Effectiveness
By Ted Barth, Managing Partner, BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC
Program Management Effectiveness Overview
One of the largest paradigms in project and program management is the proper use or lack of
use of the proper fundamental principles and project technology tools. This paradigm causes
laborious effort to plan, track, and be proactive on project schedule, work requirements and
capacity, and project costs and prevents quality performance of projects.
There are, in fact, a number of best practices that practitioners can utilize to avoid or eliminate
laborious effort, simplify the project management process, and greatly improve project and
program performance. This whitepaper will summarize the
major best practices in five categories—schedule; resource
Performance
& capacity; integration of projects in master schedules on
Management
• Schedule
major, complex programs; cost; and technology.
• Resource & Capacity
• Revenue & Budgets
Interestingly enough, these best practices are universal to
• Engineering Change
Technical Stewardship
Control
the five major, robust technology alternative choices of
• Process & Product
• Document
Management
project software manufacturers.
Management
• Specifications &
Requirements
PMP (Project Manager
Professional)
Certification
If you view program manager effectiveness in the adjacent
skill set pie chart, you will understand that the upper left
hand quadrant contains all the aspects of schedule, work,
engineering changes, documentation, and cost that pertain
to their ability to provide the project driven organization
with forecasted outcomes in the most efficient manner.
• Engineering Changes
Leadership
• Forecasting
• Recovery
• Collaboration/
Meeting
Management
Effectiveness of Scheduling Functionality
The number one project scheduling software application is spreadsheets. Spreadsheets are
popular but in reality very ineffective. They are the most
popular because they easy to use, require minimal training,
and require no company reporting standards. The negatives
outweigh the positives- spreadsheets are more laborious for
data entry and maintenance by 3:1; rarely have schedule
baselines which foster accountability; although they track
plan and actual, they cannot forecast; and are impossible to
roll up data for executive decision making.
2
0
Finish Plan
REVISED
Finish Plan
B. Thomas
2/26/08
2/26/08
2/26/08
2/26/08
3/26/08
4/3/08
4/7/08
4/2/08
4/14/08
4/9/08
4/21/08
5
E. Frank
10/10/07
10/19/07
10/17/07
10/22/07
11/28/07
12/12/07
12/17/07
12/5/07
2/7/08
2/7/08
12/12/07
3/14/08
12/14/07
12/17/07
12/5/07
2/8/08
2/8/08
12/12/07
3/14/08
Die #
Readiness
Plan
Designer
Kickoff
Plan
Readiness Actual
WSP
WSP
Front Door Inner RH / LH
Rear Door Inner RH / LH
BS
BS
WSP
Fender RH / LH
BS
SSP
Liftgate Outer
SR
A
A
23
16
Expert Plan
D3 RH
D3 LH (symm opp)
5
W. Grifka
5
J. Thompson
6
17 PP
3
22
2/26/08
Belt line and mirror flag splits. Add overdraw and finish form. Preliminary automation study completed. Official
11/29/07automation
1/17/08
2/29/08
1/24/08
3/10/08
3/3/08 as 0** 4-28.
1/31/08
study T6-11. 1/17/08
Layout and direct
trim at lower2/26/08
corners of Door.
"Final" surface
model available
Surface changing again with E/C "B" release T6-16. DDRM 4-29, DDKO T5-23(draw) and 6-2(line dies) with V5
3DDP.
11/22/07
1/17/08
8-7
there's no mirror
pocket issue.
Split issues
with wheel flare
offset formation.
Will add overdraw.
PDO
11/29/07Ditto, except
1/17/08
1/17/08
2/29/08
2/26/08
1/24/08
3/10/08
3/4/08 Final1/31/08
surface in product model available as 0** 4-28. DDRM 4-29, DDKO T6-12 with V5 3DDP.
4/2/08
11/22/07
1/17/08
3/3/08
11/22/07
1/17/08
improved in many
areas with
critical thinning2/13/08
remaining at the
weld line/mirror,
along belt line,
in lower rear
11/29/07Formability
1/17/08
1/17/08
2/13/08
1/24/08
2/22/08
2/22/08
1/31/08
corner of window, and forward of latch. ASME to work belt line and window corner areas, BIW concessions required for
mirror and inside J-Plane. Will need open hem at B-Pillar under belt molding. Final PDO Surface model available
as 0** 4-28 - use to create 3DDP. Additional concessions required. DDRM T6-2, DDKO T6-18 with V5 3DDP.
11/29/07
1/17/08
1/17/08
2/13/08
2/13/08
1/24/08
2/22/08
2/22/08
1/31/08
4/14/08
8-19
Page 1 of 4
Baseline
8/1
2/27/08
4/9/08
4/21/08
Proceeding with 4 die line up run in 144" line. Handle pocket changed to "race track" style copying CS. New data
received 4-16 - missing final hinge and spoiler interface formations, and Tail Lamp form. Final PDO surface into
product model available as 0** 4-28. Splits remaining at light bar attach points will be addressed by BIW
Engineering. New handle pocket design supplied as D% file. Will proceed with E/C "B" for die design with
DDRM 6-3 and DDKO T6-19 with V5 3DDP.
Any robust Project Technology software tool will do all of the work that spreadsheets do not
do--- including the singular most important functions—provide a critical path for exception
management (productivity), provide an accurate forecast of
Project Scheduling Engine
expected schedule outcomes, and provide project schedule
Start Variance
Critical Path
8/10
8/22
8/30
variances and resulting accountability.
Actual
Rem. Work
There are twelve best practices that all users of robust project
technology can learn and utilize in order to achieve good project
schedules. These practices primarily have to do with the
12/12/07
Formability issues with finish forming Door Cut Line flange - ASME simulating. Hole along door line return flange is to be
a clearance hole. Need: Umix cam design study and V5 development / 3DDP. GO-1 data supplied at D06 is
sufficient to proceed with Die Process maturation to design. ASME reverse engineered flare interface - ASME
surface was safe, now splitting in the "A" release. Catwalk and fascia flanges designed at "0" degree flange
angle with no compensation for springback. Attachment tab at cowl tip causing scrap lock condition. BIW will
provide concessions. Need PDO to approve change of cat walk flange to 3 degrees open. Will proceed with
DDRM 6-4 and DDKO T6-6 with V5 3DDP. Have notified the Studio, Adv Surfacing Group and BIW of the 3
degree open requested and used the LPT for support this week. Received no feed back. Design study for trim
at nose in 1 die in progress..
8-11
7-22
4/2/08
1/15/08
Need product concessions to address thinning/wrinkle issues. . Latest data shows thinning in the 30% range.
Binder raised 6 MM. PPDC representative data available T4-25 received 5-2. Additional concessions required.
Will proceed with 3DDP with DDRM 6-2, and DDKO 6-12 with V5 3DDP.
8-9
7-14
6-10
4/7/08
2/27/08
56
1/17/08
8-7
6-6
1/11/08
12/12/07
2/26/08
7-12
12/5/07
57
2/26/08
6-6
12/18/07
58
1/17/08
12/29
12/8
59
12/22
12/1
60
1/16/08
12/15
11/3
61
11/22/07
8-9
4/3/08
62
12/5/07
E. Frank
7-12
3/26/08
Dec
63
B. Thomas
7-7
12/17/07
64
10/19/07
Dies
11/28/07
Nov
65
12/18/07
11/24
66
11/17
2/26/08
67
12/17/07
11/10
68
10/27
69
11/28/07
10/20
70
10/13
11/12/07
9/8
71
11/12/07
72
October
10/6
10/17/07
8/4
73
10/10/07
7-7
6-6
21 X
D4 RH
D4 LH (symm opp)
74
10/17/07
LD/LX PPDC
10-20
E. Smith
9/1
5
75
WD
D2 RH
D2 LH (symm opp)
6-2
15 X
8/25
5
8/18
3
D1 RH
D1 15
LHX(symm opp)
6-2
76
10/19/07
77
September
8/11
SS - Blank
A
78
LX Theme
conf. 8-21
7/7
J. Thompson
A+D
%
79
LD Theme
conf. 7-25
5
21 X
80
10/10/07
11/28/07
10/22/07
August
7/28
81
7/21
82
7/14
83
W. Grifka
84
LX PDO input
due 7-7
6/9
July
6/30
6/2
D4 RH
D4 LH (symm opp)
5
6/23
85
10/17/07
10/19/07
9/29
10/10/07
9/22
E. Smith
6/16
86
D3 RH
D3 LH (symm opp)
LD PDO input
due 6-9
GO-1 Dev
5
Press Line / Automation
Build Source
GO-1 E/C Level
A
M55372320-1
A
2
5
June
Simulation Status
Die Process Engineer
CI
B/S/A Otr
(Mega)
DC
METD
5
Door Outer RR / RH LH
METD
Door Outer FR / RH LH
WSP
METD
WSP
METD
Master Timing
D2 RH
D2 LH (symm opp)
55112466-7
METD
20011 WK74 WBVP
BSA Otr.
MBT
Ship to
PFMEA
Risk/Forecast
5
Kickoff Actual
DELIVERY
1
2011 WK74
1
0
Pattern Rel.
Actual
3
D1 RH
D1 LH (symm opp)
1
Die
Status
REVISED
REVISED
Pattern Rel
Expert Actual
Pattern Rel.
Expert Plan
Plan
Plan
SS - Blank
Part Number
9/15
Part Name
PPDC 922
Part Status
8/15
Finish
Variance
Portions Copyrighted © 2010 BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC
3/18/08
3/3/08
How to Improve Your Company’s Program Management Effectiveness
By Ted Barth, Managing Partner, BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC
granularity of the tasks with work and the workflow linking of tasks and the limiting of
relationships/ schedule constraints that destroy critical path calculations that forecast schedule
outcomes that can be acted upon. They also provide project schedule baselines and standard
“rollup” rules that promote accountability which when acted upon, produces high performance
results. See adjacent diagrams.
Effectiveness of Resource & Capacity Functionality
A typical paradigm that exists is that resource
requirements and capacity are somehow related
and capacity can be resolved with a technology
“leveling” function—highly promoted by project
software manufacturers. This is simply not true-- resource requirements can be effectively
developed by utilizing resource and capacity best
practices allowing both of them to be independently time phased. These resource
requirements and resource capacity are totally independent of each other and are never equal.
This principle leads project management organizations to the ten best practices resulting in
program manager effectiveness. Granularity of tasks that will accept generic resources
(standard skill set resources) and not accept organization roles (too broad and too general) nor
named resources (names of individual contributors) which is too detailed are another
paradigm. Organizational leadership can assure the project management office (PMO) that
Resource Managers will be accountable by providing resource managers the rolled up multiple
project schedule tools filtered for their needs and the capacity planning tools.
Forecast Capacity by Resource Manager
Generic Resource Group
XXX Sub System
Production Activity Report
All ProgramsPrograms- Open Status
(2) 4 Die Redraw
7 Day Rolling Date Range xx/xx – xx/xx W/C # xxx
(1) 2 Die
D1
(6) 4 Die
Dates
D2
D3
Baseline
D4
Part No.
Oper.
Task
Rem.
Duration
07JS41 D1-11
xxxxx
xxxxx
xxx days
08LX
xxxxx
xxxxx
xxx days
Prgr.
XXX Sub System
Die
D2-13
Start
Finish
xx
xx
xx
xx
Plan
Actual
Start Finish Start Finish CP
xx
xx
xx
xx Yes
xx
xx
xx
xx
No
Monthly Stacked Generic Resource
Requirements
(X) X Die
(X) 5 Die
D1
SRS
Purchasing Activity Report
(X) 4 Die
D2
6 Week Rolling Date Range xx/xx – xx/xx
All Programs-Open Status
D3
D4
Dates
08 XXXX Sub System
Baseline
(X) X Die
(X) 5 Die
D1
(X) 4 Die
Alt.
Part No.
Die
xxxxxx
D1-11
Oper/Task
Pattern Ship
Start
Finish
Start
Finish
Start
Finish
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
CP
N
xxxxxx
Casting
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
N
08 xxxx
xxxxxx
D2-14
METD METD Supplier #1 Supplier
Ship Rec Stamp Plt.
#2___
Y
N
Betz
N
N
Betz
D4-16
2D Maching
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
N
N
Y
08 xxxx
xxxxxx
D3-17
3D Finishing
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
Y
Y
Y
ATC
08 xxxx
xxxxxx
D1-13
Home Line T/O
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
N
Y
Y
WSP
07 xxxx
xxxxxx
D2-31
DieSet Ship
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
xx/xx
Y
Y
N
SSP
D2
D3
Plan
Prgm
07 JS41
07 xxxx
ICC
Project Group
Sekley
D4
Once program management system forecasts the time phased resource requirements, resource
managers will utilize the information to schedule project task work within his/ her control.
Resource manager own Capacity forecasts then are compared to generic resource
requirements and provide intermediate term to long term capacity management tools the
organization needs to not allow internal resource capacity constraints to interfere with
customer scheduling.
These are a few of the ten best practices provide the easiest, shortest path to project
performance by providing project managers of multiple projects much a more proactive
scheduling and capacity planning by resource managers to supply projects with the right
resources at the right time—thus promoting high performance schedule and budgeted work
performance. Using robust technology--activity reports, assignment views, and capacity views
and data roll up--- provides the resource manager the tools to execute and the project manager
the tools to forecast resource bottlenecks causing unfavorable schedule and cost variances.
Page 2 of 4
Portions Copyrighted © 2010 BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC
How to Improve Your Company’s Program Management Effectiveness
By Ted Barth, Managing Partner, BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC
Effectiveness of Integrated Master Schedule Functionality
Prog
Process Subc.Activity Report
Part Number
Die
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
Task Name
D.1.13
Pre-process- Upper & Lower
D.2.14
Pre-process
Due
BASE
START
BASE
FINISH
START
DATE
1
11/15/2006
11/16/2006
11/30/2006
1
12/7/2006
12/8/2006
FINISH
DATE
ACT
START
12/1/2006
12/7/2006
12/8/2006
Process
Advanced
Engineer.Activity
Feasibility Activity
Report Report
D.3.15
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
Part Number08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
Die
08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
D.1.13
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.2.14
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.3.15
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
Pre-process
D.2.14
Pre-process
Task Name D.3.15
Pre-process
08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
Prog
Due
D.4.29 Pre-process
Pre-process- Upper
& Lower
D.2.14
Blocking Upper
BASE
START
1
11/15/2006
Pre-process
1
D.2.14
1
12/22/2006
1/3/2007
12/21/2006
1
12/11/2006
12/12/2006
12/11/2006
1
12/22/2006
BASE
START 1/3/2007
FINISH 12/21/2006
ACT
12/22/2006
Blocking Lower
-9
11/17/2006
D.2.14
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.2.14
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL
D.3.29
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL
Blocking Lower D.5.31
Blocking Pad
-21
11/17/2006
Blocking Pad D.1.13
Pre-process- Upper &6 Lower11/17/2006
Blocking Pad D.1.13
Blocking Upper
11
11/17/2006
6
11/18/2006
Y
12/15/2006
1/5/2007
12/20/200612/11/2006
12/21/200612/7/2006
12/20/200612/13/2006
Y
-8
12/4/2006
11/27/2006
12/6/200612/11/2006
12/12/200612/7/2006
12/6/200612/13/2006
N
-8
12/4/2006
0.7
11/21/2006
0.7
0.9
0.9
12/7/2006
0.9
N
0.9
11/29/2006
11/17/200612/9/2006
11/28/200612/14/2006
1
12/8/2006
N
12/15/2006
0.9
N
0.9
CP
N
Sched.
Perf. Var.
0.7
N
0.7
N
0.9
-8
12/4/2006
12/11/2006
12/7/2006
12/13/2006
12/7/2006
Y
0.9
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
-8
12/4/2006
12/11/2006
12/7/2006
12/13/2006
12/7/2006
Y
11/29/2006
11/14/2006
11/20/2006
Blocking Pad
12/13/2006
12/7/2006
12/7/2006
12/4/2006
12/11/2006
D.1.13
Pre-process- Upper & Lower
1
11/15/2006
11/16/2006
12/11/2006
12/12/2006
N
0.9
D.1.13
Blocking Upper
1
12/8/2006
12/9/2006
12/14/2006
12/15/2006
N
0.9
Process Subc.Activity Report
Part Number
Die
Task Name
D.1.13
Pre-process- Upper & Lower
D.2.14
Pre-process
Due
BASE
START
BASE
FINISH
START
DATE
1
11/15/2006
11/16/2006
11/30/2006
1
12/7/2006
12/8/2006
Y
0.9
-8
08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL
08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL
D.3.15
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
Pre-process
0.9
Y
0.9
Blocking Upper
Prog
0.9
0.9
12/7/2006
N
12/12/2006
Blocking Lower
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
Y
11/27/2006
11/21/200612/11/2006
11/30/200612/7/2006
11/21/200612/13/2006
N
-8
12/4/2006
11/27/2006
12/9/200611/16/2006
12/15/200612/11/2006
1
11/15/2006
D.5.31
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
0.9
0.9
Y
FINISH
DATE
0.9
ACT
START
12/1/2006
12/7/2006
12/8/2006
Process
Advanced
Engineer.Activity
Feasibility Activity
ReportReport
Boeing 787 Program
0.7
N
N
D.5.31
D.5.31
Y
N
0.7
0.7
0.7
12/7/2006
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.9
Y
11/20/2006
Blocking Pad
0.7
Y
0.9
1/3/2007
12/21/200611/29/2006
12/22/200611/14/2006
6
11/18/2006
1/4/2007
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
Sched.
Perf. Var.
0.7
N
N
N
11/28/2006
12/22/2006
Blocking Upper D.5.31
N
N
N
N
11/30/2006
1/3/2007
12/21/200611/27/2006
12/22/200612/9/2006
6
11/17/2006
12/12/2006
12/11/200611/29/2006
12/12/200611/17/2006
11
11/17/2006
1
0
Blocking Pad
Blocking Pad
CP
12/8/2006
12/7/200611/27/2006
12/8/200611/21/2006
-21
11/17/2006
12/11/2006
Blocking Pad
Blocking Upper
D.2.14
Y
12/12/2006
12/22/2006
CP
Sched.
0
1/4/2007
12/20/2006
FINISH
DATE 1/5/2007
DATE 12/20/2006
START 12/21/2006Perf.
Var.
11/16/2006
11/30/200611/27/2006
12/1/2006 12/6/2006
N
0.7
-9
11/17/2006
12/12/2006
12/6/2006
1
D.4.30
D.5.31
D.3.29
1
12/7/2006
12/22/2006
Pre-process
Pre-process
Pre-process
D.4.30
Pre-process
Blocking Lower
D.2.14
08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.3.15
08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.4.29
08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.2.14
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
1
12/22/2006
1/3/2007
12/21/2006
1
12/11/2006
12/12/2006
12/11/2006
12/22/2006
Y
Pre-process
Task Name D.3.15
Pre-process
D.2.14
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.3.15
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.2.14
08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
Pre-process
D.2.14
Blocking Lower
1
12/7/2006
12/8/2006
12/7/200611/27/2006
12/8/200611/21/2006
-21
11/17/2006
N
11/30/2006
0.7
11/21/2006
N
0.9
Pre-process
D.2.14
Blocking Pad
1
12/22/2006
1/3/2007
12/21/200611/27/2006
12/22/200612/9/2006
6
11/17/2006
Y
12/15/2006
0.7
N
0.9
1
12/11/2006
12/12/2006
12/11/200611/29/2006
12/12/200611/17/2006
11
11/17/2006
N
11/28/2006
D.3.15
08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.4.29
08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.2.14
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
Pre-process
D.4.30
Blocking Pad
1
12/22/2006
1/3/2007
12/21/200611/29/2006
12/22/200611/14/2006
6
11/18/2006
Y
11/20/2006
Pre-process
D.5.31
Blocking Upper
0
1/4/2007
Blocking Lower
-9
11/17/2006
D.2.14
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.2.14
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL
D.3.29
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL
Blocking Lower D.5.31
Blocking Pad
-21
11/17/2006
Blocking Pad D.1.13
Pre-process- Upper &6 Lower11/17/2006
Blocking Pad D.1.13
Blocking Upper
08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
Part Number08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
Die
08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL
D.1.13
08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.4.30
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.4.29 Pre-process
Pre-process- Upper
& Lower
D.2.14
Blocking Upper
Pre-process
D.3.29
Blocking Upper D.5.31
Blocking Pad
Blocking Pad
Due
1
BASE
START
11/15/2006
11
11/17/2006
6
11/18/2006
1
12/22/2006
BASE
START 1/3/2007
FINISH 12/21/2006
ACT
12/12/2006
0.7
D.2.14
Prog
12/22/2006
CP
Sched.
0
1/4/2007
12/20/2006
FINISH
DATE 1/5/2007
DATE 12/20/2006
START 12/21/2006Perf.
Var.
11/16/2006
11/30/200611/27/2006
12/1/2006 12/6/2006
N
0.7
-9
11/17/2006
12/12/2006
12/6/2006
1/5/2007
12/20/200612/11/2006
12/21/200612/7/2006
12/20/200612/13/2006
Y
-8
12/4/2006
11/27/2006
12/6/200612/11/2006
12/12/200612/7/2006
12/6/200612/13/2006
N
-8
12/4/2006
0.7
Y
0.7
0.9
N
0.9
Y
0.9
0.9
12/7/2006
Y
0.9
0.9
11/27/2006
11/21/200612/11/2006
11/30/200612/7/2006
11/21/200612/13/2006
N
-8
12/4/2006
0.9
12/7/2006
Y
0.9
11/27/2006
12/9/200611/16/2006
12/15/200612/11/2006
1
11/15/2006
N
12/12/2006
0.9
N
0.9
11/29/2006
11/17/200612/9/2006
11/28/200612/14/2006
1
12/8/2006
N
12/15/2006
0.9
N
0.9
11/29/2006
11/14/2006
11/20/2006
N
0.9
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
D.5.31
Blocking Upper
-8
12/4/2006
12/11/2006
12/7/2006
12/13/2006
12/7/2006
Y
0.9
D.5.31
Blocking Lower
-8
12/4/2006
12/11/2006
12/7/2006
12/13/2006
12/7/2006
Y
0.9
Blocking Pad
12/13/2006
12/7/2006
D.5.31
0.7
Y
N
N
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
-8
12/4/2006
12/11/2006
08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL
D.1.13
Pre-process- Upper & Lower
1
11/15/2006
11/16/2006
12/11/2006
12/12/2006
N
0.9
08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL
D.1.13
Blocking Upper
1
12/8/2006
12/9/2006
12/14/2006
12/15/2006
N
0.9
08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO
N
0.7
0.7
0.7
12/7/2006
12/7/2006
Y
Air Management
Systems
Bombardier C Series Program
Electrical
Power System
Program management effectiveness has the tendency
to be worse organizations with very large programs
that have multiple systems and sub systems due to the
complexity of linking workflow processes between
these complex, large programs. The best practice to
improve program management effectiveness is to have
all project, sub system, system, and program data in a
single, central database and provides the ability to build integrated data toolsets that provide
program managers the program information they need to more effectively manage a complex
program. See adjacent diagram showing multiple projects of systems and subsystems on the
left feeding data reporting on the right showing resource manager information discussed in
resource and capacity functionality section.
0.9
Effectiveness Cost Functionality
Cost (PMM5) Material Cost & Subcontractors have Unique
Project Costs have a unique set of criteria that will
Granularity
allow an advanced level of project management
Biz Intelligence is Ultimate Goal
maturity and yet keep it simple. There are five
Cos
ts-K
now
nO
nly
best practices that allow this result. Man hours
in T
otals
Cos
t to
Rev
Co
e nu
forecasted and progress tracking from resources
e Ga
sts
p
-Kn
Kno
wn T
ow
ooli
ni
n
nD
g
should be extended by standard generic rates to
M ar
eta
ket
Valu
il
es
provide man hours- human resource investment
“Vital Few”
costs. This cost best practices leverages the
resource functionality best practice of a previous
section. Purchased costs should be grouped in
material packs in the ERP system through organization of Engineering bills of materials
structure and those material costs transferred with line of business integration to the central
project database. Planned costs should not necessarily be assumed to be the same as baseline
cost since baseline costs may or may not be achievable compared to historical experience.
These are some of the cost best practices that promote program manager effectiveness.
Start ResourceCapacity Mgt
Project Finish- Next
Month In Process
Close & Forecast
#
28%
Man hour
ResourceCapacity Mgt
Single Db
Scheduling
04
05
06
07
08
Budget
Var.
Project
Start
68%
EAC Cost
Forecasts
09
10
Program Management Effectiveness Best Practices—Functionality- Technology
Page 3 of 4
Top Down:
Bottom Up: Project &
Program Management
Database
Portfolio Management
DataBase
Plan
Enterprise
Resources
Tracking Gantt
Project
Finish
Date
Baseline
Plan
Project
Finish
Date
Baseline
Project Plan
Data
All Projects View
Tracking Gantt
User Accout
Permissions
Report
Data
All Resource
View
One of the little understood advancements in
Technology has been available from all the
manufacturers of robust project software tools
since the year 2000- 2002 period. This
technology is the web based access to a central
database, otherwise known as enterprise
technology. This technology has opened the
Project A- Project Manager A
Web Parts
Project B- Project Manager B
Sharepoint Document Management- Overall or Project/ Portfolio Workspace
FilesCatia
XLS,
DOC
Issues
Photos &
Pictures
Engrg
Changes
Rev B
Portions Copyrighted © 2010 BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC
How to Improve Your Company’s Program Management Effectiveness
By Ted Barth, Managing Partner, BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC
door to a host of program manager and engineering productivity opportunities. Having all
project data in a single data base and having it web accessible to all users—project managers,
resource managers, and operational and financial executive is the single most powerful best
practice of all. There are five best practices in this area. That startling fact that to achieve this
powerful functionality that 90% of the total functionality is contained in that project scheduling
standalone functionality that everyone already has—the enterprise system capability just
unleashes these functional best practices. There are several best practices – which is not
available with all the robust technologies—is an integrated document management database
that allows document “space” with the project and programs. Another one with the Bottom
up technology now has Top down technology “Portfolio Management” technology---- all
integrated into the same central database. This technology allows organizations that formally
plan “pipelines” of planned project with full time equivalent (FTE) manpower resources.
Source of Productivity resulting in Program Manager Effectiveness
Most program management organizations who
Integrated TechnologyStandalone Tools
do not use many of the above thirty best
Single Database
practices, cannot break their paradigms of how
Project Schedules
Project Schedules
a central database can automatically produce
Resource Reqmts
Resource Reqmts
program manager effectiveness improvements
Capacity Planning
Capacity Planning
to a significant degree. The reason is that
Budget - Costs
Budget- Costs
Managers and Executives cannot visualize the
EVMS
wasted effort and laborious effort of their
EVMS
Master
Schedules
utilization of spreadsheets and project tools in
Master Schedules
order to justify the investment of technology
and structure to eliminate these inefficiencies. The adjacent diagram demonstrates how this is
possible. Note in the diagram on the left that with standalone technology and tools the data
transfers are both redundant and laborious—as demonstrated by the “spaghetti chart”. Also
note the size of the data effort is quite large represented by the width of the yellow bars. Note
that when all the data is entered into a single database, as shown on the right, that all the data
is entered only once—as represented by the blue bar. This drastically reduces effort, eliminates
redundancy, increases accuracy and produces huge gains in program manager effectiveness.
About the Author:
Mr. Barth’s use of the BNW Project Management Maturity Model and best practice approach
using principles and technoloy is considered one of the most accelerated and ease of adoption
approaches in U.S. Industry today. BNW is considered to be a subject matter expert and leader
in the development of schedule, resource capacity management and cost management use for
complex projects and programs. Mr. Barth currently is a guest speaker at PMI chapters and
industry groups nationally on these topics.
Page 4 of 4
Portions Copyrighted © 2010 BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC
Together With You
Your organization will benefit from our team’s commitment and hands-on experience.
You’ll gain a competitive advantage with a manufacturing software solution that
delivers end-to-end functionality, low cost of ownership and ease-of-use to meet the
complex needs of your manufacturing business.You’ll agree that the combination of
Infor ERP VISUAL and the BizTech Team is the right choice.
Your solution choices include:
 Business & ERP Software Systems
 Implementation Planning
 End-User Training
 Best Practice Consulting
 Data Conversion & Importing
 Version Upgrades & Migrations
 Custom Programming
 Disaster Recovery & Business Continuity
 Virtual Workplace
 Computer Network Support
BizTech is your single-source
Enterprise Resource Planning
(ERP) software provider.
With strategic technology solutions
and a seasoned implementation
team, your company will benefit
from centralized accountability,
a simplified project plan and the
most efficient implementation of
Infor ERP VISUAL.
About BizTech
Founded in 1999, Business Technical Consulting, LLC (BizTech) is dedicated to providing
complete Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and Information Technology (IT) solutions
that deliver long-term benefits to small and mid-sized manufacturing companies.
Like our 500+ clients throughout North America and 4,000 VISUAL customers
worldwide, you can rest assured that your projects are in the right hands. BizTech is an
Infor ERP VISUAL Channel Partner, a Microsoft Certified Partner, Comptia A+ Certified
and a Citrix Authorized Solution Advisor. BizTech offers industry-leading technologies
such as Infor, Microsoft, Dell, HP, Citrix, Cisco, Symantec, Sonicwall, ThinPrint, Wyse,
Epson, Lexmark, and Xerox.
The BizTech Team has one simple goal: to partner with your company in a joint effort to
improve your business processes and increase your profitability.
BizTech | 800.804.4715 | 3306 Executive Parkway Suite 201 Toledo, OH 43606 | [email protected] | www.gobiztech.com