Building a Credible Performance Measurement Baseling

Performance-Based Project Management ®, Copyright © Glen B. Alleman, 2012, 2013, 2014
V5
1/74

So much for our strategy of
winning through technical
dominance
7/74

WBS
SOW
IPTs
IMP
IMS
BOEs
CWBS
8/74
Each element of the PMB is supportive of the others
The integrated whole is the basis of a credible PMB

Attribute Beneficial Outcome from this Attribute
Maturity Flows through
Program Events
 Performance measurement is in units of increasing
maturity of the Technical Performance Measures
 Each event is a mini authorization to proceed
Single outcome for each
work package (AC)
 Measure Physical Percent Complete at the WP level
 Use 0/100 for tasks for the vast majority of work
Technical Performance
Measures are explicitly
visible in the IMS
 Connect Cost, Schedule, and Technical Performance
 EV does not provide a means of adjust for “off TPM,” but
make your own adjustments to the risk numbers for now
Risk retirement explicitly
visible in the IMS
 Risk retirement is embedded in the IMS
 Risk mitigation means waiting until the risk happens
IMS flows vertically 1st
and horizontally 2nd
 All work supports the assessment of maturity
 Isolate tasks dependencies within a Work Package
No Event linkage except
for long lead items
 0/100 requires not partial completion
Decoupled dependences
improves risk
responsiveness
 1st round IMS defines a free flowing process
 Maintaining this decoupling is key to a “dynamic” IMS
that can respond to the natural changes in the program
9/74

Risk Management
Requirements
Contractor Work
Breakdown Structure
(CWBS)
CWBS Dictionary / SOW
Integrated Master Plan
(IMP)
Integrated Master Schedule
(IMS)
Earned Value Management
System
Self Assessment / Award Fee
Determinations / CPAR’s
Measures (TPM)
Process Metrics
 Specifications
 Work Statements
 Tailored to and outlines entire program and products
 Provides a single numbering system for the program
 States all deliverables and their components
 Follows IPT and CWBS structure
 Descriptions of work traceable to the IMS elements
 Event–driven Plan provides
roadmap of processes for program
 Event–driven Schedule expands IMP
into Work Packages
 Provides details and timing
 Builds in risk mitigation activities
 Connects measures of progress with
measures of increasing maturity
 Connects System
Performance with
Continuous
Technical
Improvements
 Connects Cost
Performance
with the IMS
Performance
 Determined by program execution
11/74

Program
Events
Statement of
Work
CWBS
Significant
Accomplishments
Accomplishment
Criteria
CDRLs and
Deliverables
Tasks Contained
in Work Packages
Measures the progress to plan using Physical & Complete at the Accomplishment Criteria
(AC) and CWBS level
Defines
Aligned Aligned
AlignedAligned
Aligned
Completed SA’s are
entry criteria for
Program Events
Completed Work
Packages are exit
criteria for Tasks
Describes increasing
product maturity as 0/100 or
EVMS SD guidance
Documents the product
maturity that is aligned with
SOW and CWBS
Work necessary to
mature products
grouped by CWBS
Work structure
aligned to
SOW
12/74

DoD Guide DAG SEMP CWBS
IMP
IMS ISE
Technical Reviews
Event Timing of Technical Reviews X X X X X
Success criteria Technical Reviews X X X X X
Include entry and exit criteria for Technical Reviews
in IMP/IMS X X
Assess Technical Maturity in Technical Reviews X X X X
Integrate SEP with: IMP/IMS, TPMs, and EVM X X X X
Integrate CWBS with: Requirements specification,
Statement of Work, and IMP/IMS/EVMS X X X
Link risk management and mitigation plans with
technical reviews, TPM, EVMS, and IMS X
Integrated Reviews
Include Technical Baseline Review (TBR) in IMS; X
Integrated Baseline Review: plans for event based
technical reviews, including entry and exit criteria
Correlation of TPM’s, IMP. IMS, and EVMS
X
15/74

Only put these on your bookshelf after you’ve read them

IMS
IMP
Describes the
strategy for
successful
program
delivery
Supplemental Schedules in CAM Notebook
Tasks Contained in Work Packages
Accomplishment
Criteria
Significant
Accomplishments
Program
Events
Integrated Master Plan (IMP)
 Identifies program events, significant accomplishments, and
accomplishment criteria. System level, controlled document.
Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)
 Logic network schedule of program planned activities
keyed to the imp’s accomplishment criteria
Supplemental Schedule
 Created (as needed) to provide lower
levels of detail data within CAM notebook
 Establishes the structure, parameters and basis for the
integrated master schedule (IMS) development
 Basis of performance measurement system; common
element integrating cost, schedule, & performance
 Constructed to provide integrated planning down to the
work package task level, provides horizontal & vertical
 Supports control account schedules and
the management of day–to–day
operations
traceability, summarization of info and critical path
identification and analysis
schedules and are summarized in the IMS
and part of the program’s PMB

Form IMP
Development
Team
Gather Inputs
Establish
Criteria For
Events
Define And Or
Derive
Deliverable
Products
Define Events
For Program
And Products
Define IPT
Structure To
Implement
Product
Structure
Expand WBS
To IPT
Structure
Produce The
Product IMP
Matrix With
CWBS
Data
Dictionary
IMS Inputs
OBS Update CWBS Update
Define Program
Demonstration
Capabilities
Define
Accomplishments
For Each
Capability
Set Order Of
Program Events
Select Topics For
IMP Narratives
Define Tasks And
Work Products
For Each
Accomplishment
IMS Inputs
Summary Of IMP
With E/A/C
Initial Approval Of
IMP
Demonstrate How
Subject Are
Managed
Release To Baseline
Control For Use By IMS

… is an event–based plan depicting the overall structure of the
program and the key processes and activities. It defines
accomplishments and criteria for each event.
With the IMP, the increasing maturity of the program is stated
explicitly in the Significant Accomplishments (SA) and their
Accomplishment Criteria (AC).
It’s these key processes and activities that are the basis of the
credibility assessment.
Events are NOT milestones, they are mini–Authorizations to
Proceed. These mini-ATPs are the basis of maturity assessments
of the products and services of the program.
Work performed beyond the upcoming Program Event is
actually done “as risk.”
23/74

Through PDR, the majority of the work is building the deliverables from the CDRLs.
Each CDRL should be assigned to a single AC and be connected to a single PE for the defined maturity level.
31/74

 Without an IMP there
is no strategy
 Without an IMP the
us no place for the
work to reside
is no way to answer to
the question: “Why
are we doing this?”
is no way to measure
the increasing
maturity of the
deliverables
36/74

All work flows
vertically from
bottom up.
From Work Package
content to the Exit
Criteria of the WP
(AC), to the
Significant
Accomplishments
(SA) to the Program
Events (PE).
This flow is a
description of the
work that produces
increasing maturity.

38/74
The activities of a
Work Package
“exit” through the
Accomplishment
Criteria (AC).
Interconnections
between Work
Packages at the
task level should
be avoided.
Only 100%
complete work
should start the
next Work
Package.
PE
SA
ACs
Tasks
Completing AC starts
task in next AC
Completed Task
lands on AC

PE
SAs
ACs
Tasks
39/74

Cost Performance Baseline
Schedule Performance Baseline
Technical Performance Baseline
Perform
Functional
Analysis
Determine
Scope and
Approach
Develop
Technical
Logic
Develop
Technical
Baseline
Develop WBS
Define
Activities
Estimate
Time
Durations
Sequence
Activities
Finalize
Schedule
Identify
Apportioned
Milestones
Determine
Resource
Requirements
Prepare Cost
Estimate
Resource
Load
Schedule
Finalize
Apportioned
Milestones
Determine
Funding
Constraints
Approve
PMB
41/74

Program Events
Define the availability
of a Capability at a point in
time.
Accomplishments
Represent requirements
that enable Capabilities.
Criteria
Represent Work Packages that
fulfill Requirements.
Work
Package
Work
Package
Work
Package
Work
Package
Work
Package
Work
Package
Work
Package
Work
package
 The increasing maturing of a product or service is described through Events or Milestones,
Accomplishments, Criteria, and their Work Packages.
 Each Event or Milestone represents the availability of one or more capabilities.
 The presence of these capabilities is measured by the Accomplishments and their Criteria.
 Accomplishments are the pre–conditions for the maturity assessment of the product or service at
each Event or Milestone.
 This hierarchy decomposes the System Capabilities into Requirements, Work Packages, and the
activities which produce deliverables. This hierarchy also describes increasing program maturity
resulting from the activities contained in the Work Packages.
 Performance of the work activities, Work Packages, Criteria, Accomplishments, and Events or
Milestones is measured in units of “physical percent complete” by connecting Earned Value with
Technical Performance Measures.
The Structure of a
Performance Based
Plan
Work
Package

Monthly Status Report:
 Validate schedule status
(start/complete/slip)
 Validate work package
% complete
 Take earned value from % Cmplt
 Identify/process cost ETCs
Weekly Status Report:
 Roll up of lower level schedule
status
 Roll up of lower level % complete
or
 Milestone start/complete
 Milestone slip (early/late,
start/complete)
 Physical % Complete of tasks
Weekly Status Report:
 Milestone start/complete
 Milestone slip (early/late,
start/complete)
 % complete of tasks
Near term Rolling Wave
Control account span
IMS Activities
(at Work Package level
WP’s < 45 work days)
20 to 40
Workday tasks
Or even
weekly tasks
IMS Tasks
(one and two levels
below WP level)
IMP
WBS
Levels
1, 2, and 3
WBS
Levels
4 and 5
WBS’s
Below
Work
Package
Planning Package
43/74

Cost, Schedule, Technical Performance†
WBS
Task 100
Task 101
Task 102
Task 103
Task 104
Task 105
Task 106
†This is a Key concept. This is the part of the process
that integrates the cost and schedule risk impacts to
provide the basis of a credible schedule.
Without Technical Performance measures, Cost and
Schedule cannot show physical percent complete.
Probability
Density
Function
 Research the Project
 Find Analogies
 Ask Endless Questions
 Analyze the Results
 What can go wrong?
 How likely is it to go wrong?
 What is the cause?
 What is the consequence?
Monte Carlo Simulation
Tool is Mandatory
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
0 Days, Facilities, Parts, People
Cumulative Distribution Function
Days, Facilities,
Parts and People
46/74
DID–81650 calls out the
details of the IMS and it’s
statistical analysis

A ship on the beach is a lighthouse
to the sea – Dutch Proverb
47/74

 In the example above, the Work Package Managers collectively come to an agreement on how the sequence of
how the work will be performed within each AC.
 The result is a collective ownership of the outcome. This ownership comes from the collective development of
the project plan.
 This process is a Product Development Kaizen (PDK) and used in major aerospace, defense and product
development firms. 52/74

AC: 005
Work Pkg
Work Pkg
Work Pkg
Work Pkg
AC
AC:023
Work Pkg
Work Pkg
Work Pkg
Work Pkg
AC
 The 100% completed work in AC:005 is needed to start the work in AC:023
 In the IMP/IMS paradigm, there is no Task-to-Task connection across
Accomplishment Criteria (AC) boundaries, only within an AC
 The AC-to-AC linking states “…all work in the predecessor AC must be complete
before starting the successor work, assuring the minimum of rework due to
partially defined requirements or partially completed products”
62/74

PE: BPE: A
SA: 001
SA: 002
SA: 003
SA: 004
PE: A
Task
Task
Task
AC: 006
 The best arrangement has the completion of Event A start the first task in Event B.
 All work performed beyond the date of Event A is done at risk.
 At PDR (Event A), approval to proceed Event B (CDR) is given
 Only long lead items should cross Program Event boundaries
 All other work terminates on the Program Event where a formal review of the
planned maturity is conducted – SRR, SFR, PDR, CDR, …
 This topology assures a complete assessment of “progress to plan,” is available at
each Program Event
63/74
SA: 008
PE: B

A Credible Performance Measurement Baseline
Assures Program Management has the needed performance information to deliver
on‒time, on‒budget, and on‒specification
Technical Performance Measures
Cost Schedule
Conventional Earned Value
+
=
 The Master Schedule
used to derive Basis of
Estimate (BOE) not the
other way around.
 Probabilistic cost
estimating uses past
performance and cost risk
modeling.
 Labor, Materiel, and other
direct costs accounted for
in Work Packages.
 Risk adjustments for all
elements of cost.
Cost Baseline
 Earned Value is diluted by
missing technical
performance.
postponed features.
non compliant quality.
 All these dilutions require
adjustments to the
Estimate at Complete
(EAC) and the To
Complete Performance
Index (TCPI).
 Requirements are
decomposed into physical
deliverables.
 Deliverables are produced
through Work Packages.
 Work Packages are
assigned to accountable
manager.
 Work Packages are
sequenced to form the
highest value stream with
the lowest technical and
programmatic risk.
Schedule Baseline
65/74

Update Contractor
System Spec
Update Program
Development
Allocate
Functional
Reqmts
Update Functional
System Design
Develop HWCI
Specifications
Develop SIL
Specifications
Build Astp1
F-18 IRR
SIL Baseline 1.0
Update SIL Test
Cases
Develop Prelim
SIL CSCI
Critical
Components
AstP 1,2
SSpS 1,2,3
1
2
3
4
6
7
5
8
10
9
11
13
14
15
Update AS Test
I&T on CVN
I&T on LHA
12
Contract Award + 15 days
Systems Requirements Review (SRR)
System Functional Review (SFR)
HW Preliminary Design Review (PDR)
System PDR
EDM 1.0
Baseline
EDM 2.0
Baseline
Mfg Docs
Available
TBD
TRR 1.0
EDM 7-8 TRR
69/74
 Each collection point provides
an assessment of incremental
mission value.
 Defining these points before
the project starts is the basis of
measuring progress to plan.
 Because then you know what
done looks like before it
arrives.

Deliverables
WBS
Tasks and Schedule
Business Need
Process Invoices for
Top Tier Suppliers
1st Level
Electronic Invoice
Submittal
1st Level
Routing to Payables
Department
2nd Level
Payables Account
Verification
2nd Level
Payment Scheduling
2nd Level
Material receipt
verification
2nd Level
“On hand” balance
Updates
Work
Package
(WP)
1 2
3
4
6
5 A
B
Deliverables defined in WP
Terminal Node in the WBS
defines the products or
services that produce the
products of the project
Terminal node of the
WBS defined by a Work
Package.
Tasks within the Work
Package produce the
Deliverables
100% Completion of the
deliverables is the measure of
performance for the Work Package
Management of the
Work Package Tasks is
the responsibility of
the WP Manager.
A decomposition of the work
needed to fulfill the business
requirements
70/74

Maturity ActionProduct Product State
Adjective VerbNoun Verb
CompleteDesignModel/SimPreliminary

Risk: CEV-037 - Loss of Critical Functions During Descent
Planned Risk Level Planned (Solid=Linked, Hollow =Unlinked, Filled=Complete)
RiskScore
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Conduct Force and Moment Wind
Develop analytical model to de
Conduct focus splinter review
Conduct Block 1 w ind tunnel te
Correlate the analytical model
Conduct w ind tunnel testing of
Conduct w ind tunnel testing of
Flight Application of Spacecra
CEV block 5 w ind tunnel testin
In-Flight development tests of
Damaged TPS flight test
31.Mar.05
5.Oct.05
3.Apr.06
3.Jul.06
15.Sep.06
1.Jun.07
1.Apr.08
1.Aug.08
1.Apr.09
1.Jan.10
16.Dec.10
1.Jul.11
Risk Response
and Risk ID in
IMS
Milestone Date
traceable between
RM Tool and IMS
72/74

Glen B. Alleman
Niwot Ridge Consulting, LLC
4347 Pebble Beach Drive
Niwot, Colorado 80503
303.241.9633
glen.alleman@niwotridge.com
Performance-Based Project Management®
Integrated Master Plan
Integrated Master Schedule
Earned Value
Risk Management
Proposal Support Services

Building a Credible Performance Measurement Baseling

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (20)

Similaire à Building a Credible Performance Measurement Baseling

Similaire à Building a Credible Performance Measurement Baseling (20)

Plus de Glen Alleman

Plus de Glen Alleman (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Building a Credible Performance Measurement Baseling