Lean Product Development

Lean Product Development
Eric Rebentisch
October 5, 2005
Lean Engineering Learning Points
• Lean applies to engineering
• Lean engineering process eliminates waste,

focuses on value creation, and improves cycle time
• Efficient and standard process enables better
engineering
• Integrated Product and Process development (IPPD)
and other tools are critical for lean enterprise
ESD.61J / 16.852J: Integrating the Lean Enterprise Page 2 © Eric Rebentisch, 2005
Lecture #8: October 05, 2005 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lean Engineering Enables
Faster and More Efficient Design
Forward Fuselage Development Total IPT Labor
Prototype EMD Wireframe

Wireframe with 2D Drawing
Release Release
Results from vehicle of
Prototype approximate size and work
3D Solid content of forward fuselage
Release
Staffing
Level
Prototype
3D Solid
Release - 2000 *
Months from End of

Source: “Lean Engineering”, LAI Lean Academy™, V3, 2005 Conceptual Design Phase
Source: “Lean Engineering ”, John Coyle (Boeing), LAI Executive Board Presentation, June 1, 2000
Lean Engineering Improves
Manufacturing
Additional Reduction in T1 via
Virtual Mfg. of Approx. 9 Units
Before Lean Engineering

After Lean Engineering
Mfg.
Labor
(hrs) Reduction in
Work Content via
76% Slope Improved Design
48% Savings
83% Slope
0
-10 -5 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Source: “Lean Engineering”, LAI Lean Academy™, V3, 2005
Production Units
Source: “Lean Engineering ”, John Coyle (Boeing), LAI Executive Board Presentation, June 1, 2000
Using Efficient Engineering Processes:
Applying lean thinking to eliminate wastes and improve cycle
time and quality in engineering
• Effort is wasted
pure value • 40% of PD effort “pure waste”, 29%
waste added “necessary waste” (workshop opinion
survey)
necessary • 30% of PD charged time “setup and
waste waiting” (aero and auto industry survey )
• Time is wasted
task • 62% of tasks idle at any given time
(detailed member company study)
active
task • 50-90% task idle time found in Kaizen-
idle type events
Source: McManus, H.L. “Product Development Value Stream Mapping Manual”, LAI Release Beta, April 2004
What is Product Development?
“The
“Theset
setof
ofactivities
activitiesbeginning
beginningwith withthe theperception
perceptionof ofaamarket
market
opportunity
opportunityand andending
endingin inthetheproduction,
production,sale saleand
anddelivery
deliveryof ofaa
product”.
product”.Ulrich
UlrichK.
K.and
andEppinger,
Eppinger,S,S,Product
ProductDesign
Designand
andDevelopment,
Development,McGraw-Hill,
McGraw-Hill,1995
1995
Concept Engineering & Manufacturing Production

C Development Development C
U CUSTOMER
CUSTOMER U
REQS
S REQS
S
T RFP
CONTRACT DESIGN DESIGN T
O O
M PROPOSAL BUILD
FABRICATE M
DESIGN
E PACKAGE E
ASSEMBLE
R VERIFY
R
DELIVERED
SHIP PRODUCT
Source: Adapted from Aerojet General Corporation Briefing- “ Value Stream Analysis
Applied to the Product Development Process”
Lean Engineering:
Doing the Right Thing Right
•• Creating
Creating the
the right
right products…
products…
•• Creating
Creatingproduct
productarchitectures,
architectures,families,
families,and
anddesigns
designsthat
that
increase
increasevalue
valuefor
forall
allenterprise
enterprisestakeholders.
stakeholders.
•• With
With effective
effective lifecycle
lifecycle && enterprise
enterprise integration…
integration…
•• Using
Usinglean
leanengineering
engineeringto
tocreate
createvalue
valuethroughout
throughoutthe
the
product
productlifecycle
lifecycleand
andthe
theenterprise.
enterprise.
•• Using
Using efficient
efficient engineering
engineering processes.
processes.
•• Applying
Applyinglean
leanthinking
thinkingtotoeliminate
eliminatewastes
wastesand
andimprove
improve
cycle
cycletime
timeand
andquality
qualityin
inengineering.
engineering.
Framework based upon a decade of Lean Aerospace
Initiative research and industry/government implementation
One Approach: Value in PD Emerges
Through Uncertainty Reduction
Activities accumulate information, eliminate risk, use resources
Risk Process
Info Outcome
Value
Value
Realized
Time
Adapted From Chase, “Value Creation in the Product Development Process”, 2001.
A Framework for Reducing Uncertainty in
PD
Risks/ Mitigations/
Uncertainties Opportunities Exploitations Outcomes
• Disaster
• Margins
• Lack of Knowledge • Failure • Reliability
• Redundancy
• Lack of Definition • Degradation • Robustness
• Design Choices
• Statistically • Cost/Schedule (+/-) • Versatility
Characterized • Verification and Test
• Market shifts (+/-) • Flexibility
Variables • Generality
• Need shifts (+/-) • Evolvability
• Known Unknowns • Upgradeability
• Extra Capacity • Interoperability
• Unknown Unknowns • Modularity
• Emergent
• Tradespace Exploration
Capabilities
• Portfolios&Real Options
<Uncertainty> causes <Risk> handled by

<Mitigation> resulting in <Outcome>
Source: HL McManus and Daniel Hastings, Presentation at INCOSE 2005 - Rochester NY, July
2005
Value Measurement
• EVMS is commonly a common measure of “value” in PD

• Typically generated from WBS at project launch
• Relationship to underlying processes varies
• Level of detail can make it difficult to get program-level
perspective on state of work completed, in-process, waiting, or
otherwise in play
Waste Drivers – The Causes of Waste
Large information
Handing task over
Main Categories of Waste Drivers buffers
to colleague
Inventory
Handoffs
A
Waiting
Reinvention
… and 6 other
Engineers waiting
for data
Poor knowledge reuse

… and 36 other
Source: Christof Bauch, Lean Product Development enabling display: Making waste
transparent, TUM Thesis 2004
Complete Framework for Causes of Waste in
Product Development
Exceeding capacity
utilization
Unnecessary detail and Use of inappropriate tools/ High system variability

accuracy methods
Lack of direct access
Large batch sizes
Unnecessary features and Excessive approvals
processes
Queues on the critical path
Remote locations Excessive transactions
Inappropriate use of
competency
Unnecessary testing
equipment and prototypes
Excessive data traffic Information hunting Obvious Waste drivers
- Sub-categories -
Excessive data storage
Handoffs
4 Over processing
Stop and go tasks/ Task
switching 3 Movement
5 Inventory Poor synchronisation as
Ineffective Communication regards time and capacity
Time
Obvious Waste drivers
Poor synchronisation as
Resources/Capacity - Main categories -
Waiting for data, answers, 2 Transport/ Handoffs Info/Knowledge
regards contents
specifications,
requirements, test results
approvals, decisions,
6 Overproduction/
Over-dissemination of
releases, review events, Waste Unsynchronized processes
information
signs
1 Waiting Quality Opportunity
Information is waiting for
Redundant tasks
people
Flexibility What can be wasted? 7

Waiting for capacity
available (human or
10 Defects
Limited IT resources
machine)
Deficient information
quality
8
9 Reinvention
Lack of system discipline
Poor compatibility Erroneous data and
information
Poor capability Poor testing and

verification
Incompetence/ poor
training
Low capacity Unclear goals and
objectives
Poor design re-use
Poor schedule discipline
Unclear roles,
responsibilities and rights
Insufficient readiness to Poor knowledge re-use
cooperate Unclear rules
Source: Christof Bauch, Lean Product Development enabling display: Making waste
transparent, TUM Thesis 2004
Tracking Waste in Programs Using
Swim-Lane VSM
#1 Rework
Task #1(5day)
(3day)
Group Task #1 (5day)
A Task #4
Task #4 (5day)
Task #6 (5day)
Hand-off
Group Task #2
B Task #2 (5day) Task #3
Task #3 (5day)
Task #5 (5day)
Source: Jin Kato, LAI Plenary presentation, March 2004

Making Processes Flow
Value Stream Mapping and Analysis required for understanding
Process mapping and Design Structure Matrix methods most

powerful for process improvement
Process mapping customized for PD developed
F-16 Lean Build-To-Package
Support Center PDVSM Results
Forward to
Operations initiates Log/ Hold in
Engrg Engr answer Prepare Forward To
Request for Action Backlog Design Change Planning
Operations
Forward to Uses
Operations Revised
Planning
Log/ Hold in Prepare Tool
Backlog Planning Change Affected?
Forward to Log/ Hold in
Prepare Tool Order Process Tool Order
TMP Backlog
Forward to Log/ Hold in Prepare Tool Forward to Log/ Hold in Complete Tool
Tool Design Backlog Design Change TMP Backlog Order Processing
Forward to Log/ Hold in Forward to

Complete Log/ Hold in Accomplish Forward to
MRP Backlog Tool Mfg..
Tooling BTP Backlog Tooling Change Operations
Operations
Uses
Revised
Tool
Process Before PDVSM
BTP Elements
Worked
849 BTP packages
Concurrently
Prepare
Design Change Category Reduction
Cycle-Time 75%
Prepare Operations
Operations initiates Req. BTP Integrator Planning Change Forward To Uses
Holds Operations Revised
Meeting
Prepare Tool BTP/Tool
Process Steps 40%

Design Change
(If Applicable)
Accomplish
No. of Handoffs 75%

Tooling Change
(If Applicable)
Travel Distance 90%

Process After PDVSM Source: “F-16 Build-T- Package Support Center Process”, Gary Goodman, Lockheed
Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems LAI Product Development Team Presentation, Jan 2000
PDVSM Used For Spacecraft
Mechanical Environmental Test
As-Is Process To-Be Process
Added
Value
Required
Waste
Time Time
Category Before After Reduction
Test Cycle Time 14.7 Days 8.6 Days 41%
Labor $1,687,908 $701,564 58%
Material $554,304 $132,864 76%
Travel Distance 85,560 Feet 7,200 Feet 92%
Critical path system test cycle time reduced by 6 days

Source:Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space Systems
Additional Tools of Lean Engineering
• Integrated 3-D solids-based design

• Design for manufacturing and assembly (DFMA)
• Common parts / specifications / design reuse
• Dimensional management
• Variability reduction
• Production simulation
ESD.61J / 16.852J: Integrating the Lean Enterprise © Eric Rebentisch, 2005

Design for Manufacturing & Assembly
Reduced F/A-18E/F Parts Count
Forward Fuselage Wings and
and Equipment Horizontal Tails
C/D Parts C/D Parts
5,907 1,774
E/F Parts E/F Parts

3,296 1,033
Center/Aft Fuselage,
Vertical Tails and Systems
C/D Parts
5,500
Total*
E/F Parts
C/D Parts E/F Parts
2,847
14,104 8,099
*Includes joining parts
NAVAIR Approved
for Public Release:
SP168.04
E/F 25% larger and 42% fewer parts than C/D CC84740117.ppt

Multi-use Parts/Design Reuse
Made Symmetrical
Slat Spar 8X Multi-Use LH & RH Same
LH & RH Mirror
Slat Spar
Stiffener
3X Multi-Use
LH & RH Mirror
Made Mirror Image
2X Multi-Use LH & RH Pair Same

LH & RH Same
Slat Spar
Splices
Slat Spar Splices
• Fewer part numbers (so more of each) reduces part cost

• Same multi-use part reduces assembly variation
• Same symmetrical part reduces identification errors
Dimensional Management Enabled by Key
Characteristics
Key Characteristics: Critical few product features that significantly

affect the quality, performance, or cost of the product
System KCs
Subassembly KCs
Feature KCs
Critical parameters that cannot withstand variation – thus causing

a loss (rework, scrap, repair, or failure) in fabrication / production.
Source: Anna C.Thornton, Variation Risk Management, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2004
Variability Reduction
Dimensional Management Statistical Process

in Product Development Control in
Key Manufacturing
• Coordinated datums and Characteristics
tools • Key processes
• Geometric dimensioning • Focus on the • Control charting
and tolerancing significant few
• Process capability • Process improvement
data • Feedback to design
• 3-D statistical modeling
Lean manufacturing requires robust designs and

capable processes!
Integrated Product Team
FUNCTIONAL Team
REPS Leader
* Program Mgmt
* Engineering
* Manufacturing
Working
* Logistics together to:
* Test & Eval
•Contracting
•Suppliers Build successful programs
* User Identify and resolve issues
(All APPROPRIATE Areas)
Make sound, timely decisions
RTCE Structure Based on ICE
Evolution of a Revolution
• ICE: “Integrated Concurrent
Engineering”
• Developed initially at JPL’s
Product Design Center in 1994
• Further enabled by creation of
ICEMaker© software at Caltech
• Not talking about the design,

but actually doing the work
together!
• All design information is passed
through a central server - each
designer has access to the
latest data and sees changes
instantly
Source: David Stagney, presentation at LAI Plenary Conference, March 2003
RTCE Team Context
Tremendous Success in the First 9 months!

• Completed at least 20 new product proposals this year
• Trimmed 33% lead time from their standard process
• Created new designs in as little as 4 hours – compared to up to
4 weeks previously
• Distinct Competitive Advantage in time-sensitive situations
• Higher quality designs are being produced
• More detail, earlier in process
• Sharing over 7000 design variables in real time
• Objective decisions
• Focus on System Design - no sub-optimization
• Efficient Process and Motivated Team
Source: David Stagney, presentation at LAI Plenary Conference, March 2003
Emerging Vision of Lean PD
• PD process/state awareness and transparency

• Value-driven lean management metrics
• Flow and pull of Information and decisions
• Value stream mapping, improvement activities and
processes on a continuous basis
Built on foundation of stable, consistently executed

processes that are understood, assessed, and
continuously improved by their users
Creating the Right Products:
Creating product architectures, families, and designs
that increase value for all enterprise stakeholders.
LCC committed
100% “Fuzzy
“FuzzyFront
FrontEnd”
End”
80% Challenges
Challenges
Cost Incurred
Understanding
Understandingwhat
whatthe
the
66%
customer
customervalues
values
Ease of Change Deciding
Decidingwhich
whichproduct
productto
to
pursue
pursuefrom
fromamongst
amongst
Conceptual/ Detail Production Product use/
many
manyopportunities
opportunities
preliminary design/ and/or support/
Design development construction phaseout/dispos al Selecting
Selectingthe
theright
right
Source: Fabrycky & Blanchard product
productconcept
concept
Early
Earlydecisions
decisionsare
arecritical
critical--Disciplined
Disciplinedlean
lean
systems
systemsengineering
engineeringprocess
processisisessential!
essential!
Source: McManus, H.L., Allen Haggerty, Earll M. Murman, “Lean Engineering: Doing the Right Thing Right”, presentation
at 1st International Conference on Innovation and Integration in Aerospace Sciences, August 5, 2005
Military: Software
Development Value Stream(s)
10101010
OFP Value Stream 1010010
01010...
Delivered
Documentation (Technical Orders) Product
Concept Development
Government Certification
Support Equipment Software Changes
Multiple Aircraft Sensor Software Changes
Multiple Weapons Software Changes
Weapons & Tactics Trainers

Source: Brian Ippolito, “Identifying Lean Practices for Deriving Software
Requirements”, MIT Master’s Thesis, February 2000
Framework For Effective Front-End Process
Identification Process Flow

Feedback
Screening
Concept
Development
Business Case
Development
Best
BestPractices
Practices
Identification Screening Concept Business Case
Small multidisciplinary Senior level decision Requirements given as Clear, concise product
teams variables within concept, architecture
Active portfolio
desired range and concept of
Adequate funding management
employment
Team remains intact
Multiple requirements Strategic plan and
throughout process Based upon:
ID methods used resource constraints
• Product lifecycle
guide prioritization Data driven tradeoff
Independent strategy
analysis - use of
assessment of • Fit with product
prototypes
solution portfolio
• Returns to
organization
Closure
Closure ofof Technical
Technical AND
AND Business
Business Case
Case isisMandatory
Mandatory
Source: J. R. Withlin, “Best Practices in User Needs/Requirements Generation”, MS Thesis, MIT 1994
Company A’s Front End Process
Front-End Process Flow Business Case

Requirements Initial Concept Development /
Identification Screening Development Final Screen
Business
Market & Program
Business Commercial Plan
Initiation
Need, Research
New Ideas, Request
Technology
Developments Technical
Research
Feasibility Senior
Screening Phase Committee
Committee
Product Product
Operational
Proposal Launch
List
List List
Lists maintained by Program Management for the committees
Performance of Company A’s Front End
Process
• Single high-level Screening Committee (~7 members, VP level)

• Oversees both R&D and planning processes across company
• Approves Program Initiation Requests (PIRs) and commits company
funding ($300M-$1B authority—for reference: 1999 annual sales $2.7B)
• Work in process (annual):
• ~100 concept solutions considered
• ~10 become PIRs; 10-20 continue further investigation at lower priority
• 1-4 PIRs approved for development at final screening stage
• Cross-functional front end teams (2-9 people) remain intact until

products transition into production
• Conducts both initial studies and more rigorous concept evaluations
• Process cycle times:

• Identification: Screening Committee meets every 6-8 weeks
• Concept evaluation: 90-180 days
• New product cycle time: 2-4 years
Enterprise Information Systems for PD
• Scope of enterprise-focused PD encompasses

multiple stakeholders, stages of the product
lifecycle
CONCEPT DESIGN MANU-
MANU- PRODUCT RETIREMENT
FACTURING SUPPORT
Customer
Partners
Suppliers
Low Tier Suppliers
Lower Tier Suppliers
Source: Erisa Hines, Lifecycle Perspectives on Product Data Management,
MIT Master’s thesis, August 2005
PDM Systems in Context
• PDM is currently largely focused on engineering

• One part of a larger IT infrastructure
• Many “home grown” applications driven by engineering
• Enterprise IT infrastructure handles broader set of

functions
ERP
MRP
PDM
MANU-
MANU- PRODUCT
CONCEPT DESIGN RETIREMENT
FACTURING SUPPORT
Current Issues with PDM Use
• PDM remains focused on the design stage
• Suppliers moving up the food chain: Need for product

data management capability
• Change management and data migration are the biggest
challenges/pitfalls
• Lean principles and practices should be used when
implementing PDM capability
• PDM enables Lean Enterprise Transformation
• opportunity to address enterprise value stream

Cross-Platform Commonality Yields Significant
PD Benefits in the Auto Industry
• Result of concurrent technology transfer and multi-project

management
• Data based on 6-year MIT IMVP study of 17 auto manufacturers,
103 new programs
50
40
Percent 30
Reduction
20
10
Eng. Hours Develop. Lead Time No. of

Cost Prototypes
Cusumano and Nobeoka, “Thinking Beyond Lean,” 1998.
Many Opportunities to Benefit from Commonality
in Aerospace Systems Over System Lifecycle
Shared Higher Reduced Greater

Reduced Higher spares complexity
development tooling productivity availability in supply interoperability
costs
Reduced Reduced Reduced Fewer
cycle time spares Higher Reduced maintenance
rework
Design inventory reliability downtime hours
reuse
Rqmts PD Production Operations
Reduced
Process DMS
Lower reuse Reduced
training Reduce Increased
risk Reduced equipment training
testing operator
Reduced Economies time competency
time for Faster of scale
source solutions to Reduced Reduced
selection problems Reduced support
inventory documentation
equipment
Source: Matt Nuffort and Eric Rebentisch, LAI Plenary Conference Presentation, April 2001
Subsystem Commonality Across Product Lines
Reduces Design, Operations & Support Costs
• Commercial Airline:
• Main engine starter is common across 747-400, 767, and

767-300ER
• 26 airports service these aircraft (11 common)
• Airline only has to stock 14 spares, as opposed to 25 if they
were not common
• Military Helicopters:
• 85% commonality between UH-1Y and AH-1Z reduces the

detachment maintenance personnel requirement from
between 4 and 14 people (3 to 12%)
Source: “Managing Subsytems Commonality”, Matt Nuffort and

Eric Rebentisch, LAI Presentation, Apr 10, 2001
Increased PD Performance Using Product
Line Discipline
Organizational Data A B C D
Time Implementing PLE (years) 10+ 4 2a 10
Market Share (%) 75b 94c 60b 55
Overall Size (no. of people)d 5500 2000 1300 5000
Number of Platforms 5 6 1 8
Number of Derivatives 12 9e 0 24
PLE Ratio (Derivatives/Platforms) 2.4 1.5 0 3
PLE Cycle Time Ratio (Derivative Cycle 0.25 0.5 0.35f 0.24
Time/Platform Cycle Time)
• Firms A and D have relatively more mature PLE capabilities

• Long history of using the strategy
• Greater number of derivatives per platform
• Shorter product cycle times through derivatives
Source: Michelle Beckert, Organizational Characteristics for Successful
Product Line Engineering, MIT Master’s thesis, June 2000
Conclusions
• Lean has demonstrated significant product development-

related performance improvements in
• Engineering processes
• Program outcomes
• Company-level performance
• Multi-stakeholder enterprise and system lifecycle
• Basics of value stream mapping, waste elimination, focus on
value, and continuous improvement can be applied in a
straightforward way
• PD increases focus on information management and decision-
making processes across multiple boundaries/stakeholders
• Tools to reduce variation, uncertainty, novelty/exceptions, and
programmatic disruptions (beginning at the front end of PD
through production) enable increased focus on value creation
for customer
Resources
• LAI web site (lean.mit.edu)

• Product lifecycle knowledge area
• Presentations:
• Product Development/Product Lifecycle meetings
• LAI Plenary conference breakouts
Acknowledgements
• Allen Haggerty - MIT, • Earll Murman - MIT
Boeing (ret.)
• Bo Oppenheim - Loyola
• Ronald Bengelink - ASU, Marymount
Boeing (ret.)
• Alexis Stanke - MIT
• John Coyle - Boeing
• Chuck Eastlake - Embry- • Edward Thoms -
Riddle Boeing, IDS
• Dick Lewis - Rolls-Royce • Stan Weiss - Stanford,
(ret.) Lockheed Martin (ret.)
• Jan Martinson - Boeing, • Venkat Allada - U MO
IDS Rolla
• Hugh McManus - Metis

Design

Lean Product Development

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Lean Product Development

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Lean Product Development

Lean Engineering Learning Points

• Lean applies to engineering

• Lean engineering process eliminates waste,

Faster and More Efficient Design

Forward Fuselage Development Total IPT Labor

Prototype EMD Wireframe

Months from End of

Before Lean Engineering

Applying lean thinking to eliminate wastes and improve cycle

time and quality in engineering

Concept Engineering & Manufacturing Production

Doing the Right Thing Right

Framework based upon a decade of Lean Aerospace

Initiative research and industry/government implementation

Through Uncertainty Reduction

Activities accumulate information, eliminate risk, use resources

<Uncertainty> causes <Risk> handled by

• EVMS is commonly a common measure of “value” in PD

Poor knowledge reuse

transparent, TUM Thesis 2004

Unnecessary detail and Use of inappropriate tools/ High system variability

Flexibility What can be wasted? 7

Poor capability Poor testing and

Source: Jin Kato, LAI Plenary presentation, March 2004

 Value Stream Mapping and Analysis required for understanding

 Process mapping and Design Structure Matrix methods most

Forward to Log/ Hold in Forward to

Process Before PDVSM

Process Steps 40%

No. of Handoffs 75%

Travel Distance 90%

Critical path system test cycle time reduced by 6 days

• Integrated 3-D solids-based design

Source: “Lean Engineering”, LAI Lean Academy™, V3, 2005

ESD.61J / 16.852J: Integrating the Lean Enterprise © Eric Rebentisch, 2005

E/F Parts E/F Parts

ESD.61J / 16.852J: Integrating the Lean Enterprise © Eric Rebentisch, 2005

2X Multi-Use LH & RH Pair Same

• Fewer part numbers (so more of each) reduces part cost

Lecture #8: October 05, 2005 Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Source: “Lean Engineering”, LAI Lean Academy™, V3, 2005

Dimensional Management Enabled by Key

Key Characteristics: Critical few product features that significantly

Critical parameters that cannot withstand variation – thus causing

Dimensional Management Statistical Process

Lean manufacturing requires robust designs and

• Not talking about the design,

Tremendous Success in the First 9 months!

• More detail, earlier in process

• Sharing over 7000 design variables in real time

• Focus on System Design - no sub-optimization

• Efficient Process and Motivated Team

Source: David Stagney, presentation at LAI Plenary Conference, March 2003

• PD process/state awareness and transparency

Built on foundation of stable, consistently executed

Support Equipment Software Changes

Multiple Aircraft Sensor Software Changes

Multiple Weapons Software Changes

Weapons & Tactics Trainers

Identification Process Flow

Front-End Process Flow Business Case

Lists maintained by Program Management for the committees

• Single high-level Screening Committee (~7 members, VP level)

Value Stream Mapping and Analysis required for understanding

Process mapping and Design Structure Matrix methods most