[email protected]:(972)3-510-1768 -1- &D Management R&D ManagementCopyright 2002Dr. Alex Coman The Kite Project Model OEM/VAR Risk Sim ProtoGen

[email protected] Tel:(972)3-510-1768 -1- WWW.Coman.org R&D Management

R&D Management Copyright 2002 Dr. Alex Coman

The Kite Project ModelOEM/VAR

Risk Sim

ProtoGen

ProductExistential

PlatformRiskKiller

Nice-to-have Value

V&V

ActivityTactical

GatingStrategic

Gating

Activities/Work Packages

Assignment:Time(Resource,Feature)Freeze

Stabilize

ResourcesOrganization

VIP/BN/

Leaders

Structure Resources: Project/Functional Product: Configuration Management Project: Kite

Push/Pull/ Drum-Buffer-Rope



The Kite Project ModelKnowledge Area Initiating the Project

Determine Project Goals 2 Determine Deliverables 2 Determine Process Outputs 1 Document Project Constraints 1 Document Assumptions 2 Define Project Strategy 1 Identify Performance Requirements 2 Determine Resource Requirements 2 Define Project Budget 1 Provide Comprehensive Information 2

Planning the Project Refine Project Requirements 8 Create WBS 7 Develop Resource Management Plan 6 Refine Time and Cost Estimates 6 Establish Project controls 6 Develop Project Plan 7 Obtain Plan Approval 7

Executing the Project Commit Project Resources 10 Implement Project Plan 9 Manage Project Progress 11 Communicate Project Progress 9 Implement Quality Assurance Procedures 9

Controlling the Project Measure Project Performance 7 Refine Control Limits 4 Take Corrective Action 7 Evaluate Effectiveness of Corrective Action 5 Ensure Plan Compliance 7 Reassess Control Plans 4 Respond to Risk Event Triggers 6 Monitor Project Activity 5

Closing the Project Obtain Acceptance of Deliverables 4 Document Lessons Learned 2 Facilitate Closure 3 Preserve Product Records and Tools 3 Release Project Resources 2

Professional Responsibility Ensure Professionalism and Integrity 8 Contribute to Knowledge Base 3 Enhance Individual Competence 5 Balance Stakeholder Interests 7 Interact with Team and Stakeholders 6



Project PlanningSolicited

RFI, RFP, RFQ; PO

Work-Breakdown-StructureWBS: SRS

ComponentProcedure

Work Packages1%-5% of total

TechnologicalPrecedence

Program-Evaluation & Review-TechniquePERT

UnsolicitedMarketing-Requirement-Document

MRD

Statement-Of-WorkSOW

Telecommunications:ConceptPlanningBusiness requirementsSystem requirementsNetwork planTechnical specificationsImplementation phaseEngineering designBilling implementationOperations engineeringCustomer serviceLaunch Bill-Of-Materials BOM:

COGS: Recurring Costs

MRD PRD Spec

MKT/R&D

MKTR&D/MKT



Solicited: Request-For-Product (RFP); ClientAutomatic Teller Machine

Work-Breakdown-Structure (WBS);Systems engineering

Procedure; Resource managementHW: RFI, Spec, RFP, Auction

SW: Analysis, Design, Code, Test

Technological PrecedenceHW required for SW testing

Statement-Of-Work (SOW); SalesDeposit and Withdraw funds

Hardware

Input

Card

Output

ScreenKeyboard Checks Printer Money

Work PackagesApproximately 50

Program-Evaluation & Review-Technique (PERT)

Software

Security Withdrawal DepositComm.

Three planning horizons:RFP responsePre AnalysisPost Analysis

Project Planning: ATM Machine



Duration Planning

Man MonthsWork

Resources

Duration

Effort EstimateFunction-Points

Program-Evaluation & Review-TechniquePERT

Calendar

Schedule

Critical-Path-Method

CPM


R&D Management Copyright 2002 Dr. Alex ComanStrategic Gating: Configuration Management/Control

StrategicGating:

Prioritization

StrategicGating:

Prioritization

UsersUsers

Tier 1Tier 1Tier 2Tier 2Tier 3Tier 3Tier 4Tier 4

BugsBugs

Marketing/Sales

Marketing/Sales

Refactoring/New Tech.

Cost Reduction

Refactoring/New Tech.

Cost Reduction Project

Tactical Gating:

In Kit, BMT

Roadmap

SteeringCommittee:

Priorities

SteeringCommittee:

Priorities

QA:

Out Kit

RepositoryECO

ProductionFCO

Fix/Patch


R&D Management Copyright 2002 Dr. Alex ComanBad Multitasking: Lead time + Mental

Setup

Productivity of Development Engineering Time

1 2 3 4 5Projects assigned concurrently to a single engineer

% t

ime

spen

t on

va

lue-

addi

ng t

asks

Job1Job1Time

Job1Job1 Job2Job2Job2Job2 Job3Job3 Job3Job3

TimeJob 1Job 1 Job 2Job 2 Job 3Job 3

Lead Time + Work-In-Process

Job1Job1 Job2Job2Time

Individuals on the team

Ded

icat

ion

to p

roje

ct (

%)

020406080

100

Job1Job1Job1Job1 Job2Job2Job2Job2 Job3Job3 Job3Job3Job1Job1 Job2Job2



StrategicGating

G&G=g&g

Project Management Root Cause Analysis

BadMulti-Tasking

Constraint: Resources:Technical + Managerial

LargeWork Package

Throughput--

Goal: Throughput↑

Un-DesiredEffects

(Measurable)

RootProblems

Framework

Objectives

RootConflict

Projects

Save Mgmt.Resources

ShortenLead TimeEfficiency

Due-DatePerformance --

ReworkCycles ++

Time-To-Market++

Quality --- x10

Student

SpecCreep

95% CompleteCoordination

Failure

FinesPositionin

gHigh risk

AdHocDeSpec40-20-40

IncompleteKits

MentalSetup

WIP++

Over Design

GatingDifferential ABCD

Project TaperingReUse; Outsource


R&D Management Copyright 2002 Dr. Alex ComanType A: Customization /

MaintenanceWell-known existing technology.

Some type of construction

Engineering consulting firms perform product architecture, engineering design

and resource planning.

Basis for price quotation and contract negotiation with potential contractors

responsible for project execution.

Product entirely shaped and design completely frozen prior to execution phase.

Projects executed after formal contract is signed.

Managed in formal and rigid style. No changes introduced.

Focus: finish on time within budget.

Little development, testing, redesign.

Communication between teams through formal channels, documents, and forms.

Regular meetings on a low rate basis: once a month / two weeks.

Payment mechanism: Fixed price, contractual milestones.



Type B: Next Generation

Building a new product in a well-established industry, developing a derivative or

modification of a previous design to achieve better performance, increased reliability

or extended operational life.

Contractors responsible for entire range of activities: engineering design, resource

Planning, execution.

Technologies employed not entirely new. Some development and testing.

Only limited changes added to the initial design.

Managers resist change and avoid excessive costs.

Design frozen early, no later than first or second quarter of execution period, after

one or at most two design cycles.

No formal risk-management procedure

Communication more intense, regular weekly or biweekly meetings of the management

team, biweekly or monthly meetings with major subcontractors. Additional in-between

Communications: ad hoc meetings, telephone, E-mail to resolve occasional problems.



Type C: New Product DevelopmentCompletely new product or system that did not exist in the past.

Some “new to the industry”, new product line for company.50% based on technical feasibility rather than market need, initiated by contractor.Long periods of development, testing and redesign.Design freeze scheduled in 2nd or 3rd quarter of the project’s duration. Was not

concluded until 2-3 design cycles were performed.Many changes were made before the product’s specifications were finalized.A much more flexible attitude, extensive trade-offs. Often requirements can not be met

without substantial addition of time and budget. Sometimes customers agree towaive requirements.

Intensive formal and informal communication among project teams, customers.Written status reports, computer printouts, minutes, messages and memos. But, major

flow is oral, conducted during meetings for problem solving and information sharing.Meetings of the project team, all subcontractors, customers.

Atmosphere of open communications and continuous discussions. In some casessocial events: parties, barbecues and field trips to increase interaction and reinforce Team cohesiveness and spirit.

Payment mechanism: Cost Plus components, contractual milestones.



Type D: First-Of-A-Kind FOAKProjects envisioned to respond to some far-reaching needs.

No adequate technology is available at project initiation.Focus: extremely high level of uncertainty as to what technology should be used.Customer decision to commit to the project marked by hesitation because of risk involved.To prove validity of the system’s concept (POC) and to test unknown technologies: involve an intermediate program in which an experimental, scaled-down prototype model is built.Product design and specification freeze scheduled for a late moment, often during the third quarter of the project.2-5 design cycles.Management style: high level of flexibility and tolerance for change, high awareness of potential problems.Atmosphere: “Look for trouble – it must be there; if you don’t see it, you have a problem.”High uncertainty and continuous flow of changes require enormous amounts of information exchange and extensive communication. No one waited for formal meetings and documents to report problems and documents.



National Semiconductor’s Customer Scenario

Design twoSubsystems:

•Power•Circuitry

Select a part forPower supply

Based onParameters

Explore option:Review product

DetailsDo cost/benefit

analysis

Choose a Part

WebenchExpertSystem Data

Folders

Cost/BenefitAnalysis

ProductData Sheets

Chipsimulations

What otherParts doI need?

Runsimulations

Create a Design

Bill ofmaterials

SubsystemSimulation

Select a part forcircuitryBased on

Parameters

Explore option:Review product

DetailsDo cost/benefit

analysis

WebenchExpertSystem Data

Folders

Cost/BenefitAnalysis

ProductData Sheets

Chipsimulations

What otherParts doI need?

Runsimulations

Bill ofmaterials

SubsystemSimulation

Build designInto prototype

For testing

Outcome:Complete circuitry design

For mobile phone

Order parts for prototype

Order reference designprototype

Build

Buy

Bill ofmaterials

Build Prototype

Select specificBill of Materials

for power supply Run thermalSimulations toSee interaction

Have aSatisfactory

design

Analyze Design

Bill ofmaterials Iterative Loop

Thermalsimulation

Select specificBill of Materials

for circuitry

Iterative LoopBill of

materials


R&D Management Copyright 2002 Dr. Alex ComanClassical Model

Planning1. Project initiation

Defining Goals and Priorities Defining Constraints Basic Assumptions Quantitative measures of success

2. Initial definition Learning the current system Initial definition of

Output Input Data stores

3. Feasibility study Identifying alternatives Estimate:

I/O volume, Processing frequency File sizes

Economic feasibility Organizational/Operational feasibility Technological feasibility Comparing alternatives Selecting preferred alternative

4. System analysis of: Output Input Storage Processes Equipment Procedures:

Operation Backup Recovery Data security Control

Conversion and Training5. Detailed Design

Building Programmers: Programming, Debugging Organizational team: File conversion,

Acceptance testing, Operation Analysts: Supervision, testing.

Operation1. Operation2. Fixing bugs3. Measuring: Next Generation



6 MeasuresFeasibility Study:Alternatives: Make or Buy6 Measures: soft vs. hard benefitsFinancial:

Throughput = Sales – Direct Expenses; Throughput/Bottleneck Hours.Cost reduction

Operating Expenses: efficiency = less people or more productivityCompetitive:

Agility: Lead Time=Time(Finish–Start)=Work+Wait. Due-Date-PerformanceCustomization: printed material (not off the shelf)

Functional:Inventory: Raw materials+Work-In-Process+Finished GoodsQuality

Process: Total QualityProduct/Service: Mean-Time-Between-Failure (MTBF)

Commtouch Anti-Spam-Active-Protection server.: Osterman: 66%(Email)=Spam(57%@2001) 75 email/day=14,500 spam/year. 213 Mega Byte/user/year. $50,000/year employee = $389/year lost time:‘2000 $10B/redundant links to web. Likewise ISP. 1/100 innocent as spam. charge $20/mailbox if 10,000 users. Distributors: 35%-50% revenue. Pret-A-Manger “time trade-off”: <90 seconds to buy sandwich. Save 10Mins vs. Deli.Hazera: Cotton seeds that shorten growth by 3 weeks. Critical, 1 in 5 years early rain damage.Rockets for 30%/60% damage of Tank platoon, headquarters. Increased accuracy.McDonalds: Chicago franchiser asked for extension to his franchise agreement got it in one hour vs. 20 months in past.(Forbes, June,15,’98p.43)



Brand

Value Boosters

Throughput

Sales

Corporate Value

WIP

Operating Expenses

Direct Expenses

Quantity Price

Customization QualityAgility

ConstraintManagement

ControlCycle

Current-Reality-Tree

CriticalChain



C Project: Cycles Excessive paddingD Project: System Dynamics; Graphical-ERT

Management Challenges

Risk Management:A Project: Net/CPM, GanttB Project: PERT =β DistributionBullwhip effectReliability: 80%Student EffectOver designMonte Carlo Simulation.

DurationP

roba

bilit

yOptimistic Pessimistic

MostLikely

Expected= (O+4M+P)/6

SOWMarketing

PrototypingProgramming

AnalysisTesting

Study

Make Make40%

SOWMarketing

PrototypingDecision

Analysis

Study Buy Buy60%



Effort Estimation: Function Points

UserSpell

Checker

3.Internal File:Dictionary

2.External File:Document

To be Checked

1.Input:Name of Document

4.Interactive Inquiry:Progress (words)

Output:5.No. Words reviewed

6.No. Errors found7.List of misspelled words

COnstructive-COst-MOdel Lines of code Team Client Environment: productivity

Simple measures: Building: surface Airplane: weight Submarine: volume

Project cost: X9 System Product

Non Development Items Andersen consulting

ProgramSystem

InterfacesIntegration

ProductGeneralization, Testing,

Documentation,Maintenance



V & V

Verification &

Validation

ExaminerDeveloper

Verification

User

Validation

Site

Developer

User

QA α

βCustomerSupport

76%56%

V 1.0V 8.0Correctness

50%50%

V 1.0V 8.0Programmers

80%

20%

V 1.0V 8.0Post α

Usability engineering – Jacob Nielsen:12 Bank account statement forms.Info: Size of recent deposit; Interest rate; Credit limit38 beginner development staff; Two users observed



V & V



Old SystemNew System

Beta site(s)

All Sites

Pilot

Incremental

OldSystem

New Function1New Function2

New Function3

Instant

Old SystemNew System

Parallel

Beta site; Function1; ParallelAll sites: Instant

Clean room

Conversion

EDI in the Netherlands

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993Start Pilot

ProjectPilot Project Operational

Follow-up Project Implementation Projects

1 Supplier: Phillips20% Purchasing Value

45,000 Purchase Order Lines/year4 Suppliers

28% PV60,000 POLs/year

7 Suppliers35% PV

90,000 POLs/year

Top 20 Suppliers65% PV

180,000 POLs/year

Phillips: 1 exchange/dayOthers: 1/week



250%:380%Spec

100%Code

70%Use

75%Test

47% None

Cost of [Lack of] Quality: X10 Law. IBM, GTE, TRW 240

Exposed

Nielsen: 1Complaint

24Damaged

Quality criticality: Supplier to Operator vs. OEM+Sale to Operational/marketing vs. Engineering



Rapid prototyping

RapidPrototyping

Design

Validation

Application

Programming

Lifecycle

Disposable

Generator

Expandable

Designer4GL

Designer4GL

ProgrammerCoding

ProgrammerCoding

Prototype

= Spec.

Prototype

= Spec.

Designer4GL

Designer4GL

ProgrammerCoding

ProgrammerCoding

CodeGenerator

CodeGenerator

Designer4GL

Designer4GL

4GL Expansion4GL Expansion

Prog. ExpansionProg. Expansion

Application Generators4th Generation Languages: 4GLRapid Application Development: RAD

In Silico vs. In vitroEvogene has bioinformatic ability to predict genetic behavior in plants prior to actual testCan develop miniature plants for accelerated testing. Many plants take less space, lifecycle accelerated. 1 year=3 tomato generations vs. 1

GUI validationRisk managementSimulation



Life-Cycle Configuration Management: Product Roadmap

Rapid Prototyping

MarketingSystems

Engineering PrototypeDevelopment

QualityIntegration

ProductionSales

ServiceSpiralRelease

Features

Windows 3.1, April 92 10.5MB

Windows 95, August: 76MB

Windows 98, Q2: 120MB

Windows 2000

Features

NT 3.1, 1993 6.1 MLOC

NT 3.5, 19948.3 MLOC

NT 3.51, 199510.1 MLOC

NT 4.0, 199618.9 MLOC

Millennium, 200030 MLOC



Brisk Technology Innovation – Sony HandyCamDate12/85

ModelM8

OpticsViewerOptical View FinderLens15mm Fixed Lens

Optical to Electronic

CCD250,000 Pixels CCDCircuitM-series Board

RecordingDrive8mm Double HeadCassette8mm Cassette

SoundMicrophoneElectro CondenserPower Supply

BatteryNP-22AdapterACP-80UC

AC PackCasingM-series Casing

7/86

M10

Modified

Modified

4/87

V-300.7 inch B/W CRT12-30mm Zoom

V-series Board+Playback feature

V-series Casing

10/87

V-50

12-72mm

Modified

ACP88UC

Modified

1/88

V-90

Smaller

300,000V-90

Triple Head

NP-55AC V33 w/

Adapter Pack



Extreme Development: Wave PLM

Time/Release

Features/Function Points

88: DOS 4

Mar 93:MS-DOS 6Disk Backup & Compression

Windows CE

93 NT3.1: 32 bit29K copies; 6.1MLOC

NT3.5: Faster, StableSOHO; 8.3MLOC

NT3.51: Web ServerNo need for special SW;

10.1MLOC

NT4.0: Large Data Proc.1997 update: Cluster

1.6M copies18.9MLOC

Millennium: Most Demanding TasksUser/Info Dir, Intelli-mirror;

30MLOC

92 94 95 96 97 98 99 0093

Apr 92: Win 3.1: Screensaver,TrueType 10.5MB

95: TCP/IP; 76MB

98: HTML editor; 120MB

2000

4.1 5

Spiral (Release:DB&S+Fluid+ASP)+Variety (Porting+Versioning)+Distributed



Product Development Life Cycle: PDLC

Time

CashFlow

Peak

ReleaseN

Initiation Breakeven

Market Potential

ReleaseN+1

TerminationLaunchLegend:Goldman and Muller

Development Introducti

on/

Growth

MaturityDecline

Time To Market

Payback

KaplanComan and Sadeh: TOP



Technology Optimization Planning - TOP

Time

CashFlow

)2(23

232)

232

(

232

)0

2(

abT

baTdT

cbtatd

cbtatT

dtcbtTat

MAX

-b2a

Tr=1.5*TTPr<Td Time

CashFlow

Retailer

Developer

Release1.0

Release2.0

Time-To-Peak - TTP TTP2

Peak

Launch

CF=at2+bt+c

Term

ination

TTPr<TTPdT

erm

inat

ion

Td=1.5(-b) 2a

TTPr2

Documents

[email protected]:(972)3-510-1768 -1- &D Management R&D ManagementCopyright 2002Dr. Alex Coman The Kite Project Model OEM/VAR Risk Sim ProtoGen