l5 Project Org

8/13/2019 l5 Project Org

1/40

ESD.36J System & Project ManagementLecture 5

Project Organization andArchitecture+-Instructor(s)

Prof. Olivier de WeckDSM contributions from

Prof. Steve Eppinger

9/18/2003


2/40

+

- Introduction

Project Organizations Dedicated Project Organizations Matrix Organization Influence Project Organization

Integrated Product Teams (IPTs)Alignment of Organization and Architecture

DSM Overlap: Tasks, Product Elements, Teams Industrial Examples

Intro to HW3

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 2


3/40

+

- Views of Project ManagementFunctional View Organizational View

Team-orientedwho will contributeand how arewe organized? Today!

TeamsSPM

Task-orientedwhat needs tobe done?

Tasks

DSM, SDElements

CPM/PERT

Methods and Tools Product-orientedhow can we plan, what is the architectureexecute and monitor of the system/product?most effectively?

Instrumental View Architectural View9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 3


4/40

+

- Views during Project LifecycleDetermine Project

OrganizationProject

Preparation Project

Planning

ProjectAdaptation

Project

Monitoring

Enterprise has

chosen what productor system to develop

Modify Project(Defined Architecture)Organization as needed

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 4


5/40

+

- Classical Project Organizations Dedicated Project Organization strong

Team members work 100% for the project

Empowered project manager Organizationally recognized unit for a certain time

Matrix Organization Project manager has tasking and budget authority Line manager has functional authority, promotions Team members remain in their functional organizations (have

2 bosses)

Potential for conflicts

Influence Project Organization Weakest form of project organization pure functional organization Project coordinator has no budget or tasking authority

weak9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 5


6/40

+

- Organization ChartsInfluence PO Matrix PO

CEO

PM

Div1 Div2 Div3

6

GM

PMs

PM

PM

FM FM FM

PM

PM

Tm1 Tm2 Tm3Staff

Project

ing

Dedicated PO

Experiences workingin these organizations?

Customer

SteerCommittee

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM


7/40


8/40

+

- Project Organization SelectionInfluence PO Matrix PO Dedicated PO

Scope small medium large

(# tasks)Duration short (M$100Simultaneity

many a few very few(# concurrent proj)

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 8


9/40

+

- Internal Team OrganizationResponsibilities Type of personnel

Teams Execute design, build and testtasks

Technical and process experts,domain specialists, integrators

ProjectManager

Planning, monitoring,adapting project execution,allocate resources

Leader type personality, expertin methods & tools,communicator, stress resistant

ProjectStaff

Update project plan, trackresources and progress,documentation, communicate

Mix of experienced and newstaff, reliable, tool experts,multidisciplinary focus

Steering

Committee

Approve project plan, secure

resources, interface withcustomer, decide variants

High-level internal stakeholdersw/authority, externalconsultants

ExternalCustomer

Set high level goals, provideresources, agree to scheduleand scope changes, go-no go

depends on industry, e.g. govtagency representatives

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 9


10/40

+

- Integrated Product Teams (IPTs)

Multi-functional team ofspecialists working as one

product-oriented decision power E.g. F/A-18 engine evolving membership over

Integration IPT

lifecycle

can be mapped to metatasks in DSM

popular since early 1990s

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 10


11/40

+

- PM Organization Questions

Why is proper organizational design of aproject important?

For what reasons might a projectorganization need to be modified over time?

What are your most important experiences ofworking as/with project managers withinthese organizations?

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 11


12/40

+

-

Decomposition, Architecture,

and IntegrationDecompositionis the process of splitting

a complex system into sub-systems

and/or components.System architectureis the resulting set

of interactions among thecomponents.

Integrationis the process of combiningthese sub-systems to achieve anoverall solution.

System integration needs are determined by thechosen decomposition and its resulting architecture.

We map the structure of interactions in order to planfor integration.

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 12


13/40

+

-

Organization DSM Application:

Engine Development

Site: General Motors Powertrain Division Product: new-generation engine Structure: 22 PDTs involved simultaneously

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 13


14/40

+

-

Decomposition of the Engine

Development Project22 PDTs

Engine Block PDT composition

Cylinder Heads

ve Train

1 product release engineer

Camshaft/Val 1 CAD designer

Pistons 3 manufacturing engineersConnecting Rods 2 purchasing representatives

Crankshaft 2 casting engineers

Flywheel machine tool supplier

Accessory Drive 1 production control analyst

Lubrication 1 financial planner

Water Pump/Cooling production personnel

Design Intake Manifold

EngineExhaust

E.G.R.Air CleanerA.I.R.Fuel SystemThrottle BodyEVAPIgnition SystemElectronic Control ModuleElectrical SystemEngine Assembly

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 14


15/40

___ ___

___ ___

___ ___

___ ___

___

___

___

___

+

-

Integration Analysis Survey

How often do you need to sharetechnical information with theother PDTs in order to completethe technical tasks of your PDT?

PDT Daily Weekly Monthly Never

Engine Block Cylinder Heads Camshaft/Valve Train Connecting Rods

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 15


16/40

PDT Interactions+

-A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V

Engine Block A A Cylinder Heads B B

Camshaft/Valve Train C C Pistons D D

Connecting Rods E E Crankshaft F F

Flywheel G GAccessory Drive H H

Lubrication I I Water Pump/Cooling J J

Intake Manifold K

K

Exhaust L L ME.G.R. M

N Air Cleaner N A.I.R. O O

Fuel System P P Throttle Body Q Q

R

Ignition S EVAP R

S E.C.M. T T

Electrical System U U Engine Assembly V V

Frequency of PDT Interactions

Daily Weekly Monthly

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 16


17/40

+

-

Existing System Team

Assignments

Short Block

Engine BlockCrankshaft Connecting Rods

Flywheel Lubrication Water Pump/Cooling

Induction

Exhaust

E.G.R.

Ignition

Pistons

Valve Train

Cylinder HeadsCamshaft/Valve Train

Intake Manifold Air Cleaner

Accessory Drive Throttle Body

Fuel System A.I.R.

Emissions/Electrical

Electrical System

Electronic Control

E.V.A.P.

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 17


18/40

Existing System Teams+

-A F G D E I B C J K P H N O Q L M R S T U V

Engine Block A A Crankshaft F F

Flywheel G GPistons D D

Connecting Rods E E Lubrication I I

Cylinder Heads B Camshaft/Valve Train C Water Pump/Cooling J

B C J

Intake Manifold K K

P Fuel System P

Accessory Drive H H Air Cleaner N N

A.I.R. O O Throttle Body Q Q

Exhaust L L M E.G.R. M

R

EVAPR

Ignition S S E.C.M. T T

Electrical System U U Engine Assembly V V

Frequency of PDT Interactions

Daily Weekly Monthly

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 18


19/40

Proposed System Teams+

-F G E D I A C B K J P N Q R B K O L M H S T U V

FCrankshaft FTeam 1 G Flywheel G

Connecting Rods E E Pistons D D

Team 2 Lubrication I I Engine Block A A

C Camshaft/Valve Train C Cylinder Heads B1 B1 Team 3

K1Intake Manifold K1 JWater Pump/Cooling J

P Fuel System P

N Air Cleaner N Throttle Body Q Q

Team 4 R EVAP RCylinder Heads B2 B2

IntegrationIntake Manifold K2 K2 Team

A.I.R. O O Exhaust L

L

ME.G.R. M Accessory Drive H H

Ignition S S E.C.M. T T

U Electrical System U Engine Assembly V V

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPMFrequency of PDT Interactions

Daily Weekly Monthly 19


20/40

+

-

Team 1

Integration Team

Team 2

Team 4

Team 3

FlywheelConnecting Rods Throttle BodyEngine Block

Lubrication

Water Pump/

CoolingCamshaft/

ExhaustE.G.R.

Ignition

Crankshaft

Cylinder HeadsIntake Manifold

E.V.A.P.

Fuel System

Air Cleaner

Electronic Control Module

Pistons

Valve Train

A.I.R.

Electrical System Engine Assembly

Accessory Drive

New PDT-to-System-Team Assignments9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 20


21/40

+

- Lessons Learned: Integration

Large development efforts require multipleactivities to be performed in parallel.

The many subsystems must be integratedto achieve an overall system solution.

Mapping the information dependencereveals an underlying structure for systemengineering.

Organizations can be designed basedupon this structure.

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 23


22/40

+

-

System Architecture Example:

Climate Control System

Engine

Heater

Core

Compressor

Controls

Case

Rad

iator

Condenser

Fan Oncoming

Heater Hoses

A/C Hoses

Evaporator

Blower

Motor

Accumulator

Blower

Evaporator

Air

InteriorAir

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 24


23/40

+

-

Engine Compartment

Chunk

Vehicle Interior

Chunk

Engine

Heater

Core

Compressor

Controls

Case

Rad

iator

Condenser

Fan Oncoming

Heater Hoses

A/C Hoses

Evaporator

Blower

Motor

Accumulator

Blower

Evaporator

Air

InteriorAir

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 25


24/40

+

-

Front End AirHeating Loop

Engine

Heater

Core

Compressor

Controls

Case

Radiator

Condenser

Fan Oncoming

Heater Hoses

A/C Hoses

Evaporator

Blower

Motor

Accumulator

Blower

Evaporator

Air

InteriorAir

Air Conditioning Loop

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 26


25/40

+

-

Climate Control System Architecture

EATC Controls

Refrigeration Controls

Heater Hoses

Command Distribution

Sensors

Radiator

Engine Fan

Condenser

Compressor

Accumulator

Evaporator Core

Heater Core

Blower Motor

Blower Controller

Evaporator Case

Actuators

Strong Interactions

Weak Interactions

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM

K J D M L A B E F I H C P O G N

K K

J J

Conditioning

Connections

Controls andD D

M M

L L

A A

B B Front End AirE E

F AirFI I

H H

C C

P P

Interior AirO OG G

N NK J D M L A B E F I H C P O G N

27


26/40

System Team Assignments+-

Front End Air Team Interior Air Team

Radiator

Engine

Fan

Condenser

Accumulator

Compressor

Evaporator

Core

Evaporator

Case

Heater Core

Blower Motor

Blower Controller

Actuators

EATC

Control

Refrigeration

Control

Heater

Hoses

Command

DistributionSensors

A/C Team

Controls/Connections Team

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 28


27/40

+

-

System Architecture Example:

P&W 4098 Jet Engine9 Systems Design Interfaces:

54 Components Spatial, StructuralEnergy, Materials

569 InterfacesData, Controls

-9/18/03 29

Modular Systems

Distributed SystemsESD.36J SPM


28/40

+

-

Lessons Learned:

Product/System Architecture Hierarchical system decompositions are evident.

System architecting principles are at work. There is a disparity between known interfaces

and unknown interactions.

Integrating elements may be functional and/orphysical.

Hypothesis: Density of known interactionsnovel mature

learning optimization

experienced

sparse dense clustered9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 30


29/40

+

-

Comparing the System Architecture

to the Organization Structure

Product Decomposition Development Organizationinto Systems into Teams

Technical interactions Team interactionsdefine the architecture implement the architecture

How does product architecturedrive development team interaction?

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 31


30/40

+

-

Research Method: Mapping Design

Interfaces to Team Interactions

Resultant Matrix

Task assignment assumption:

Each team designs one component

Team

Interaction

Yes

Yes

No

No

Design Interface Matrix

Team Interaction Matrix

Design Interface

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 32


31/40

+

-

Design Interfaces:P&W 4098 Jet Engine

9 Systems Design Interfaces:

54 Components Spatial, StructuralEnergy, Materials

569 InterfacesData, Controls

-9/18/03 33

Modular Systems

Distributed SystemsESD.36J SPM


32/40

+

-

Development Organization:

P&W 4098 Jet EngineLow intensity interaction

60 design teams clustered intoHigh intensity interaction

10 groups. Teams interaction intensity:

Capture frequency and importanceof coordination-type

communications (scale from 0 to 5). Interactions that took place during

the detailed design period of theproduct development process.

Design executed concurrently.

Six system integration teams

Team Interactions9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 34


33/40

+

-

Overall Results

No(2453)

TeamInteractions

Yes(409)

341

(12%)

228

(8%)

2225

(78%)

68

(2%)

Yes No(569) (2293)

Design Interfaces

We reject the null hypothesis that team interactions

are independent of design interfaces.

2 = 1208 >> Critical 2(0.99,1) = 6.635

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 35


34/40

+

-

Design Interfaces Not Matched by TeamInteractions

No(2453)

TeamInteractions

Yes(409)

228 2225

341 68

(40.1%)

(59.9%)

Yes No(569) (2293)

Design Interfaces

-9/18/03 36

HYPOTHESES:H1:

matched by team interactions.

H2:

interactions.

ESD.36J SPM

Across boundaries, design interfaces are less likely to be

Weak design interfaces are less likely to be matched by team


35/40

+

-Data set: 569 design interfaces

78.8% are

matched

47.8% are

matched

Team

Yes

Yes

No

No

Design interfaces

WITHIN organizational

boundaries

Design interfaces

ACROSS organizational

boundaries

Second criterion:

Design interfaces matchedby team interactions

Design interfaces NOT

matched by team interactions

First criterion:

59.9%

40.1%

Effect of Organization/

System Boundaries Interactions

Design Interfaces

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 37


36/40

+

-

Effects of Organizational/System Boundaries(modular vs. integrative systems)

Data set: 569 design interfacesNo

Team

InteractionsYes

Overall:

Yes NoDesign Interfaces

36.4% of ACROSSdesign interfaces

are matchedDesign interfaces 78.8% areWITHIN organizational matchedboundaries

53.2% of ACROSS

design interfacesDesign interfaces 47.8% are are matched

ACROSS organizational matchedboundaries

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 38


37/40

+

-

Lessons Learned:

Architecture and Organization

by studying the architecture of the product

Team

Yes

Yes

No

No

We can predict coordination-type communications

Interactions

Design Interfaces

83% of coordination-type communication were predictedTeams that share design interfaces may notcommunicate when

Design interfaces cross organizational boundaries

Design interfaces are weak (within organizational boundaries) Teams communicate indirectly through other design teams (across

organizational boundaries)

Teams that do not share design interfaces may stillcommunicate when

Unknown design interfaces are discovered Design interfaces are system-level dependencies

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 39


38/40

+

- Types of DSM Models and Analysis

Task

Parameter

Organization

ComponentClustering

Sequencing

Iteration

Overlapping

Data Type Analysis Type

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 40

+


39/40

+

-

HW3

The UAV engine manufacturer is introuble Excellent product quality Capacity too small > schedule delays due

to queuing > need to double capacity circa 160 employees

Step in an recommend a projectorganization to the CEO

out: next Tuesday 9/23, due: 10/29/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 41

+


40/40

+

-

Conclusions

Three dominant, classical POs Dedicated, Matrix, Influence

Most real projects are a mix of these pure forms IPTs emerged as main organizational form within complex

product development projects Alignment between product/system architecture and

project organization is crucial Can use DSM overlap analysis to quantify alignment Potential for deliberate project organization design

Project Organizations can change over time Conceptual design > ad-hoc teams w/ system architect Detailed design > IPTs, dedicated PO or matrix Implementation, Operations > can be conducted in functional org.

9/18/03 - ESD.36J SPM 42

l5 Project Org

Documents

Transcript of l5 Project Org