Learning Objectivesaucache.autodesk.com/.../v1_BO5347_Wagenaar.docx · Web viewNot every organization is rushing to leverage the new features in AutoCAD® 2012. This class profiles

Standards and Process and Vault, Oh My! Case Study of a CAD Modernization ProjectCatherine Wagenaar - K-TEK Solutions

BO5347

Not every organization is rushing to leverage the new features in AutoCAD® 2012. This class profiles an organization that realized that it needed to move their CAD operation into the 21st century. Tasks included redefining CAD standards, establishing a documented design process, standardizing on a specific version of AutoCAD, switching from paper markup to redlining, implementing a tracking system based on Autodesk® Vault that would facilitate use of the new standards and process, and much more. With so many elements, this project entailed a number of unique challenges. The focus of this class will be on these challenges and how they were overcome.

Learning Objectives

At the end of this class, you will be able to: Describe techniques to get a "big picture" view of an organization's CAD design needs Identify methods to define a complex project with multiple deliverables Articulate what is needed to successfully overcome organizational inertia and fear of change List the value, key features and functions in Autodesk products to modernize an organization and

make it more efficient

About the Speaker

Ms. Wagenaar possesses extensive knowledge of all aspects of the consulting business and has a reputation for attention to detail and commitment to quality. She has led consulting organizations, as president of K-TEK and as owner of Wagenaar Consulting. While with Autodesk Consulting, Ms. Wagenaar was responsible for large engagements—ensuring they were professionally managed, that deliverables met client expectations, and that teams achieved on-time project completion. Her 30-year career has been focused on the application of methodology in the deployment of software: project management, quality management, configuration management and software development lifecycle methodologies. She is skilled in building rapport with clients, partners, and team members. Ms. Wagenaar graduated from Mohawk College, with an applied arts and technology degree in computer systems technology. Her post-graduate training has included configuration management, ISO 9001, 6 Sigma, and Rational Unified Process.

Cathy Wagenaar, President and COO K-TEK [email protected] www.k-teksolutions.com

mailto:[email protected]

Standards and Process and Vault, Oh My! Case Study of a CAD Modernization Project

Introduction

This class profiles the CAD Modernization Program for the LADOT, City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation, an organization that realized it needed to move their CAD operation into the 21st century. K-TEK joined forces with U.S. CAD and DLT Solutions to deliver a program to redefine their CAD standards, establish and document a design process, standardize on a single version of AutoCAD®, implement digital redlining and implement a tracking system based on Autodesk® Vault.

The focus of this class will be on how we approached the challenges of this multi faceted project and how they were overcome.

The Consultative Methodology

Let’s begin by looking at how K-TEK approaches every consulting engagement. We call it the Consultative Methodology.

In the Assess phase, we gather information about the customer, their organizational roles and responsibilities and their goals. We request a series of representative documents and drawings so that we can assess their current workflow. Collecting this information ensures that we are more efficient and effective in dealing with our customers and that we can tailor our recommended solution to their specific needs.

In the Plan phase we use the information from the assessment and develop a plan to guide the project. A proper plan defines the scope of the project, what is to be done, who will do the work, and when it will be done. The plan also sets the expectations for the project team and the customer.

2

Assess

Plan

Solve

Confirm


In the Solve phase, we review the customer’s business and workflow processes, and carry out the plan, which can include services, training, configuration, and other tasks (for example things like a skill gap analysis).

I believe that services projects rarely fail due to our inability to solve technical problems. Projects fail due to misaligned expectations. Preparing a plan, communicating the plan, and then managing the plan are all mechanisms to communicate with the customer, and ensure that everyone’s expectations continue to be aligned.

In the Confirm phase, we follow up with the customer to verify success.

You’ll notice that the process is shown as cyclical. That’s because we work to involve the customer in every phase of the project. In fact, you can think of the customer as being in the center of this cycle. After each deliverable, we meet to confirm that we’ve met customer expectations. If necessary, we revisit any of the phases to make corrections and updates.

This approach applies to all types of projects, not just those related to CAD. Getting a better understanding of how to plan, execute and solve a problem will help you in all types of project work.So, this process helps us answer questions like ‘where do we start?’ with a program like CAD Modernization.

Describe techniques to get a "big picture" view of an organization's CAD design needs

In this learning objective we discuss activities in both the Assess and Plan phases.

UtopiaA few years ago, K-TEK built a series of videos that included AutoCAD®, Revit® MEP, Autodesk® Ecotect® Analysis, Autodesk® 3ds Max® and a number of other products. In one of the videos, we positioned a building at a particular lat/long, told the technology what day of the year it was, and what time of day, and then visualized the angle the sun was coming in through the windows. We visually flew through the mechanical systems, we had avatars walking through the scenes and we saw various other moving parts. Really entertaining to look at, and it made for what I called at the time, “great TV”. The problem was, that many of our customers use their products very much like they did when they first started using them – and as a result, are probably using a very small percentage of the features and functions available to them. They might like the new tools and concepts, they get it when they see it, but they simply have no idea how to get from where they are now to the technical utopia that is being presented. Forgetting about that utopia for a moment, let’s get down to earth. One of our K-TEK consultants used to work in Autodesk Support. I remember her telling me that, after a new software release came out, the number one question coming into the support lines was ”how do I make the software look the same as it did before the upgrade?”

3


And on a personal level, after the “ribbon” came out, did you spent considerable time and frustration trying to figure out where they moved that command you relied upon? So the question becomes how do we, in the Autodesk ecosystem, help customers modernize their CAD environments and take advantage of all of the great productivity tools now available while still working with the familiar product that they love? The case study we discuss here is a project that K-TEK is currently engaged in with LADOT, the City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation. The DOT commissioned an initiative called the CAD Modernization Program. The department was using several different versions of AutoCAD®, going back to AutoCAD® 2005. LADOT had identified that they lacked standards and documented processes. They realized that they needed to upgrade to the latest versions of software and standardize. K-TEK and DLT recommended a phased approach to the customer. We offered short-term initiatives that addressed standardization of processes and tools and improved consistency of drafting skills, and we also offered medium- to long-term initiatives to further increase team productivity and open up entirely new capabilities for making their CAD drawings more “data rich”.

It’s not about TechnologyBut, technology is only part of the story. We all know that modernizing a CAD environment is not only about Features & Functions. Nor is it always about buying more technology. It’s about being more effective & efficient with what we have.

To do that:• We need to address how we approach data, process and standards. • We need to be more effective with what we have. • We need to manage and protect our investments: Organizations make huge investments in data

(drawings, documents, databases, X-refs, spreadsheets) without addressing the question of how they will manage or protect that data.

• We need to consider our other resources, such as people, and how we can maintain our process and standards if we lose those people.

• Yes, technology is important, but we need to consider how people, technology and teams work together.

• Finally, and maybe most importantly, we need to address the psychology of, and the fear of, change.

Where to start?In the Assess Phase, we started by looking at the big picture & how technology serves as a tool. To make the technology sing, the fundamental elements - Data / Process / Standards / Software - need to work together.

We need to understand the entire spectrum:• Where’s the data? • How do you find it? • Is it current?• Is it protected? • Can you get to it when you really need it, even if you can’t get to the office?

4


• Are your processes consistent & efficient? • Do you have standards? • Should you?• Are they being adhered to?• What technology is available for what?

Start with the end in mindRecognize that things are interconnected, so don’t look at anything in isolation. You need to start with a high level concept of where you want to go – what does success look like? This enables you to implement the right solutions, step by step, with forethought. If you know where you’re going, you can choose the appropriate processes, technology, project team and training modality.

Also, stay as flexible as possible for as long as possible, while understanding the project’s constraints. That is, when do you say ”yes” and when do you say “no”. Don’t try to overdesign the solution too early. Don’t try to anticipate all details of the requirements. And, be ready to change your mind as you learn more.

Since end users often can’t visualize what they will want until they start to see what they can get try to avoid the ‘big bang’ and take small bites. The ‘big bang’ approach can be very risky. A successful project is like eating an elephant – you can only take one bite at a time. Make incremental improvements, at the rate at which the customer can absorb them, both from a cultural and economic perspective.

This approach also serves to mitigate risk, in that individual program elements are smaller, can be implemented more quickly, and will start generating return on investment sooner. Incrementally implementing change in the environment over time, while the implementation team is still actively engaged in the overall program, allows customers to support their end users while having our support.

At K-TEK, we have seen that these methods allow us to develop projects in a highly flexible and interactive manner, proving success along the way.

We like to teach our customers to ‘fish’ by assigning a customer support team for the project.Support requests are funneled through the support team by the customer team. This creates internal experts (champions) over time. K-TEK also encourages involvement in the project by the local partner (in this case, U.S. CAD), with the intended result that they can continue to support the customer after the K-TEK project team has moved on. The more the partner is involved in what we did, the better they will be able to support their customer after we’re gone. Program ComponentsLet’s take a look our case study for LADOT, the CAD Modernization Program. These are the high level components that we identified.

• CAD Upgrade (Software & Skills) • CAD Standards Update & Improvement• Process Rationalization & Documentation• Project & Document Tracking System (using Autodesk® Vault)• Electronic Redlining• Automated Materials Lists

5


• Training on each component

Let’s look at each one of these individually.

CAD UpgradeThis component included:

• Upgrading the entire team’s software so they all had the same tools• Defining and implementing true CAD standards, layers, blocks, line types, etc.• Determining how to maintain and enhance the CAD standards • Methods for enforcing the use of CAD standards• Developing a job description and duties for a CAD Manager – the department didn’t have a CAD

manager. • Creating a training plan for staff on CAD standards and AutoCAD® Map key features• And implementing ongoing skills reviews

CAD Standards Update & ImprovementAs I’m sure you know, the challenge with CAD Standards is everyone thinks they already have them.But we have learned that with a few key changes, we can offer great improvements to existing (or non-existent) standards.

We asked the DOT the following types of questions:• Do designers and drafters still create their own layers or blocks for items not in your standard?• Do designers explode blocks to get the results they need?• Is it difficult to bring new staff up to speed on your CAD Standards?• Does your team create designs that look right on paper but are inconsistent within the CAD files

themselves?

We worked with the DOT to evaluate existing CAD Standards, create a plan for improving them where necessary (including CAD files and documentation) and provide training to the design and drafting teams to ensure that their new CAD Standards were being used and maintained going forward.

One sample improvement was that the DOT revised their block library to take full advantage of AutoCAD®'s dynamic blocks. Leveraging the dynamic block feature alone has cut the size of their block library by nearly 60%, and made it easier locate the correct blocks, provided more drafting flexibility and it simplified training.

Process Rationalization & DocumentationMost organizations have a standard design process, or at least they have good intentions and strive to follow a design process. What we found was that for the department, the process was passed down by mentoring from senior staff, and it often wasn’t formalized. The consequence was that everyone followed what they believed the process to be, but inconsistencies created inefficiency and increased risk.

K-TEK worked with the DOT to improve their processes in several areas:

Process Rationalization: Different groups within the organization followed processes that were similar at a high level but differed greatly in the details. Some of the details included how status was tracked, how

6


responsibility was assigned, how projects were managed, and what documentation was maintained. These inconsistencies created inefficiency and increased risk. K-TEK, being outside of the organization, could more easily identify where discrepancies occurred. We took a dispassionate view of how things were done and worked with the department to identify inconsistencies and rationalize design and drafting processes.

Process Documentation: Sometimes the very act of writing down a process can identify gaps and weaknesses. Our diverse project experience gave us the necessary skills to gather process information from individuals at all levels in the department, and structure, review and revise it to match the their desired process. Once it was approved, we packaged it into a web-based format that was easily accessible by the entire team.

Process Training: and finally, we created and delivered customized process training courses that matched the new processes. These courses were delivered as a web-based, eLearning.

Project & Document Tracking SystemWith respect to implementing a project and document tracking system, we asked LADOT these types of questions:

• Do you lose track of drawings? • Are you unsure what the latest version is? • Do you ever lose track of design project status?

In the past year, K-TEK has been working with the Autodesk® Vault Workgroup product. Autodesk® Vault has been used for many years as a mechanical design solution. But, we found that Autodesk® Vault is in truth, a general purpose application, and we think it was the perfect platform for document management and project tracking for the department.

The key to a successful Autodesk® Vault implementation is proper configuration, so we gathered information on:

• Overall project flow• Project and document tracking data• Important project milestones• Review and signature process• Distribution and archiving documentation

Armed with this information, we developed a specialized configuration for Autodesk® Vault to meet the department’s needs.

Electronic RedliningThe DOT followed a traditional engineering approach to designs and updates, where engineers indicate changes by marking up paper, typically with a red pen. We gathered, from everyone involved, that this approach was costly because large drawings are time consuming to plot, deliver from one location to another, and then to digitally enter those marked changes into AutoCAD®.

So, we looked at alternatives using digital technology. At a relatively low cost, the Autodesk® Design Review product enabled Department Engineers to review and redline documents electronically. We

7


recommended starting with a pilot project to pioneer the use of electronic redlining technology followed by a wider rollout to users across the organization.

Automated Materials ListsAutomated material lists go a long way toward increasing accuracy and improving efficiency. At LADOT, many designs are rejected because they are too expensive. In many cases, it takes months to get this determination because it is laborious to manually ‘count’ design components and calculate costs. In many cases this results in redesign, costing more time. Currently, LADOT does not take advantage of the power within AutoCAD® to embed data within graphical entities to represent specific objects. When those items are used in a design, they can be automatically counted and used to generate a materials list. The goal of the Automated Material lists project is to use the standard data-enabled blocks defined within the CAD standards as the foundation to enable designers to increase project efficiency by automatically creating material lists.

Training on each of the componentsK-TEK has always had a reputation for providing the best and most advanced custom training content and delivery. In this economy, many of our customers are looking for training flexibility that allows them to train people in the office rather than sending them out to another location for several days.

To that end, we’ve spent significant time investigating advanced technology solutions associated with training. We want to give our customers the best solutions possible for today, which to us, means providing the ability to learn on the go when people have time to absorb the content.

Here’s what we considered:

Hybrid training models: We know instructor-led training is effective. We also know that sending people out of the office for days is unrealistic right now. eLearning can be effective, but it’s difficult to put someone in front of a computer-based training for 8 hours. We asked ourselves, “How can we combine eLearning with instructor-led training?” We found that overlaying a video of the instructor on the digital learning content holds the student's attention longer than digital content alone. The training is effective, and it can be absorbed at the student’s own pace, when they have time available.

Interactive knowledge checks: Many training courses require some form of test, quiz, or learning check to reinforce the student's knowledge. K-TEK has created a variety of options in this area. Some of our tests include graphical interactions, while others provide personalized learning certificates that students can print when the course is completed.

Software simulation: K-TEK has pioneered the use of software simulation technology to create realistic interactive scenarios without requiring AutoCAD installed on the student's desktop. This is ideal situation to get students comfortable with the software. It has the added benefit of avoiding the cost, effort, and risk of deploying software to student workstations before it’s required.

SummaryIn discussing this Learning Objective, we considered the following:

8


• Customers often see Utopia and want to jump quickly to the final result without completing the necessary incremental steps to get there.

• We described that there are elements other than technology to be considered. • We looked at how to get started with the Assess phase• And, remembered to start with the end in mind during the Plan phase. • Finally, we looked at how the LADOT CAD Modernization program was broken down into defined

and achievable components.

Identify methods to define a complex project with multiple deliverablesRecall our Consultative Methodology cycle. This Learning Objective describes activities in both the Assess and Plan phases.

The Assess Phase

In this case, the customer commissioned the CAD Modernization Program, and, of course we started with the Assessment. The steps are depicted in the diagram. The goal was to recommend efficiency improvements in the design project workflow, including the use of AutoCAD®. We also prioritized the improvements and allocated funding to them, considering things like, business value, cost, resources required and risk.

Survey EnvironmentFirst we surveyed the current Environment. During the survey, we interviewed staff using questionnaires focused on current processes and tools used to perform design work. We also observed users operating AutoCAD®. We toured the physical “vault,” a file storage area for Mylar drawings, and examined the indexing scheme and the drawings. We reviewed template files, standard CAD blocks, directories for CAD drawings, standards and procedures for Engineering and CAD and five project tracking systems ranging from paper to custom software.

The considerable detail uncovered about the “as is” environment served as a reference for defining the changes, and a useful description of the “before” picture forming the baseline for those changes. We looked at the environment from these perspectives:

• Organization - LADOT’s structure, job roles, functions and locations• Processes and Workflow - standards and procedures for creating, managing, and sharing

information

9

Survey Environment

Document Findings

Define Changes

Make Recommenda-

tionsApprove

Develop Plan


• People - we looked at how job skills were acquired, maintained, and developed• Technology - the hardware, software, and networks being used, supported and managed• Business Environment - and, aspects of the environment that were changing

These perspectives could not be considered in isolation as people perform work, according to processes, supported by technology.

Document FindingsAlthough the information gathered was intended to be a factual description of the current environment, some key issues were also uncovered. For example, in some areas, no consistent end-to-end view of the overall design project lifecycle existed. These issues were presented and analyzed in the Key Findings deliverable and considered the ramifications of each issue and identified the focus areas where changes were defined and recommended.

Define Changes The purpose of this step was to present a “vision for change” and a set of actions, which when implemented, would move the department in the direction of that vision. We took a broad approach to recommending changes to the design project environment. Recommendations included short-term initiatives that addressed standardization of processes and tools, and improved consistency of drafting skills. We also recommended medium- to long-term initiatives that would further increase productivity, such as geospatial referencing of drawings, and automatic generation of material lists.

In general terms, the “vision for change” for the design project environment had the following characteristics:

Consistency: All Documents that are produced, processes that are being followed, and information that is being tracked are all highly consistent from one drafter to another, and from one group to another. This consistency makes it easy for projects to be rotated among Engineers or drafters, and for others to join a project or pick up another staff member’s work. CAD and process standards make it easy for Engineers and drafters to produce accurate and consistent design documents that follow the design standards with a minimum of effort and high degree of reuse.

All Digital/All Network Enabled: All information (that is, documents, process descriptions, training information, templates, guidelines, etc.) is readily available on the network. The information is stored and maintained in well-defined and clearly-named locations and information on where things are stored and how to find them is well defined and understood by all staff.

Well Integrated: A well-integrated environment is one where related and associated information and documents are logically and intuitively connected and easily accessible. Given any specific document, it is easy and fast to find related documents. Given any project, it is easy to find project status and all related drawings.

10


Projects are Visibly Managed: In an organization where projects are visibly managed the project tracking system is integrated into the network and design process so that individuals can easily view project status and make status updates with minimal effort. Because project status is visible, staff is more mindful of their individual efforts to keep projects on schedule.

Easy Access for External Parties: 3rd parties working with the department will find that the standards and other information are readily available, and that project reviews are straightforward and cost-efficient. Documents can be easily exchanged electronically with others outside the DOT.

A Model of Efficiency: More time is spent doing productive work and less time is required to find information, to redraw existing content, and to review and approve documents. Staff is more satisfied because they don’t feel like they are wasting their time and management is pleased because more work is getting done with the same size staff.

Near Term Change Initiatives With our visions for change in mind we looked at our change opportunities. The Key Findings identified through the Survey were the input for developing the initial list of change initiatives. Each finding was rated based on popularity based on how frequently it was mentioned in the interviews, and significance, indicating the severity of the issue. The 16 Key Findings were mapped to a list of 8 change opportunities that addressed items to be “fixed” in the current environment, as indicated in this chart:

Key Findings Popularity Significance Change OpportunityNo Designated CAD Manager 1 3 Fill CAD Manager roleWide variance in core AutoCAD skills 3 3 Train staff to consistent level of CAD

skillsSome Engineers don’t understand CAD 1 2Most Key processes are not documented

2 3 Document processes and train staff on their use

Inconsistent new hire on-boarding process

1 2

Confusion over how things are named 0 2Inconsistent document referencing 3 2 Improve document naming,

referencing and versioning standards (including non-CAD documents)

No system for document versioning 3 3No management of non-CAD documents

1 2

Status tracking needs improvement 1 3 Extend tracking system to all areas and simplify usability

Lack of adherence to CAD standards 3 3 Establish comprehensive CAD standards with official network location for templates and files and automation to facilitate use

No single source of standard templates and blocks

3 3

Missed opportunities for automation 1 3

11


No official location for standard documents

1 3

Old AutoCAD versions in widespread use

1 1 Standardize on a single new version of AutoCAD

General systems management concerns

1 3 Address systems concerns

Longer Term Change Initiatives Four longer-term change initiatives were identified to address “unmet” requirements that either came up during the Survey or were presented as opportunities to bring additional business value. These potential longer-term initiatives were as follows:

• Move to electronic redlining of drawings• Move drawings to a single consistent coordinate system• Leverage drawing content to create parts lists• Improve document linkage and exchange

Stakeholders evaluated and prioritized the change initiatives. They agreed on scope and quantified them according to: cost, timeframe, impact, and probability of success. They assessed the business value of implementing each change, ranking them based on questions like:

• Will this change reduce the time to get projects done?• Will it improve drawing quality, consistency, and reusability?• Will it provide staff with a better work experience?• Will it give management better insight into how things are operating?

Finally, Stakeholders voted on each change initiative.

Make RecommendationsNear Term Projects There were three near-term projects:

• Project #1: CAD Update - improved the efficiency, accuracy, and quality of CAD work.• Project #2: Process Efficiency - focused on documenting work processes.• Project #3: Reduce System Failure Risk - included steps to improve the reliability of the

department’s systems and reduce the risk of system failure.

All change initiatives within these projects provided high benefits, modest costs, and a high probability of success. They were implemented within a short timeframe, and benefits were realized quickly.

Longer term Projects Four projects were defined as longer-term:

• Project #4: Project and Document Management - improved the way LADOT managed its design project environment.

• Project #5: Process Improvement - Electronic Redlining. implemented technology to allow for electronic drawing markup, saving time and printing costs.

12


• Project #6: Drafting Efficiency - Automated Material List. Allowed LADOT to export a bill of materials directly from CAD drawings.

• Project #7: Drafting Efficiency - Single Coordinate System. allowed improved reuse of drawings, as they were representative of real-world space.

These projects created new capabilities that provided additional business value.

Once packaged, each project was described further:• Business Value - How will it improve efficiency, work product quality, or job satisfaction?• Key Elements - What are the major steps involved?• Cost Estimates - How much will it to cost for hardware, software, and implementation services?• Estimated Timeframes and Staging - What is the project duration and the sequencing of key

elements? • Deliverables - What are the work products?• Additional Considerations - Do other items need to be considered in order to enhance the

probability of success?

These points are important because, as we will discuss in the next Learning Objective, one of the challenges in this project was helping the customer overcome fear of change. By clearly articulating things like business values, costs, benefits and other considerations, the customer better understands why changes are necessary. ApproveAt this point we met with the customer to ensure that stakeholder expectations were being met and to make sure everyone was still on the same page before we proceeded. Again, meeting often with the customer, getting their buy-in on small milestones and continually aligning expectations was essential in mitigating risk and ensuring success.

The Plan PhaseOnce we got LADOT’s approval we were ready to move to the next stage, developing the Plan. LADOT’s participation was required to execute the plan. Since, there was an impact on the LADOT’s human resources; they needed to be included in the schedule. Also, it was necessary for LADOT to understand their commitment levels.

So you can imagine that our plan had to be flexible. It was not possible to plan ahead more that about two months at a time because we knew that things would be in a state of perpetual change. In large part, LADOT’s projects drove the schedule. In the third Learning Objective we will look more closely at project management and the techniques we used to manage these challenges.

Project # 1: CAD UpdateYou’ll remember that the first Near-term project was CAD Update

This project comprised included key elements: • Define and implement true CAD standards (as opposed to drafting standards)• Address the need for formal CAD management• Standardize on a single version of AutoCAD®

13


• Train staff on CAD standards and AutoCAD® key features• Maintain and enhance CAD standards• Enforce use of CAD standards• Create ongoing standards training• Implement ongoing skills review

Consider for a moment, the first element, ‘Define and implement true CAD Standards’ and let’s look at one of the steps associated with planning the project: creating the work breakdown structure.

This is an example of how we created the work breakdown structure. We expanded the specific activities and tasks for each element within each project.

Getting to this level of granularity allowed us to then identify the appropriate delivery resource skill levels, estimate the level of effort and task duration and understand where and how we needed customer involvement, and then determine the interdependencies between activities and tasks.

Remember earlier we discussed Utopia, avoiding the big bang and keeping the end in mind. This type of work breakdown structure helps customers stick to manageable steps and absorb the change, thus mitigating risk.

Current StatusSo, what’s the bird’s eye view of the LADOT CAD Modernization Program?

• There were approximately 300 activities further broken down into discrete tasks• We estimated over 500 person days of effort would be required to complete the project

14


• To date, 7 project team members have been involved in delivering the services• The initial contact with the DOT was December 2007• The 5-month Assessment started in June 2008• Planning was conducted in early 2009• Implementation started in March 2010 • At the time of writing, the project is approximately 70% complete• Completion is planned for Spring 2012

And, since the project started, a lot has happened:• The first LADOT Project Manager took early retirement• The recession took hold• Tax revenues were affected which then affected LADOT’s funding and they were required to

reduce staffing levels

These occurrences made this last CAD Modernization project, Project Management, even more important.

Management ProjectProject Management was necessary to effectively plan, monitor, communicate, and measure the progress of all of the near-term and longer-term projects. It was important to develop the implementation strategy. We defined, in detail, the scope of work for each of the projects, using the same top down methodology described above for “Dine and Implement CAD Standards”. This included identifying the deliverables, effort, duration, and the resources.

We applied strict project management practices, including managing scope, risk, changes, and critical decisions. And, we required the customer to supply wet-ink signatures for all deliverables.

SummarySummarizing the Learning Objective – Identify methods to define a complex project with multiple deliverables: K-TEK, using their arsenal of project management tools, effectively planed, monitored, communicated, and measured the progress of all of the near-term and longer-term projects.

Articulate what is needed to successfully overcome organizational inertia and fear of change

Previously, we discussed how the fear of change may be even more important than technology. Human nature is to resist change. I believe in implementing solutions in small incremental chunks that are palatable and can be done at a pace that allows customers to absorb the change, from both a budgetary and a capability perspective.

Using the Consultative Methodology in a cyclical manner allows us to take a small step, confirm it with the customer, revisit the planning, if necessary and then move to the next step.

Over the past few years, we have learned that the BIG BANG theory doesn’t work and that solutions are best implemented incrementally, over time.

15


I believe that you should take a ‘walk before you run’ approach and don’t try to do too much too fast. For LADOT, as much as possible, CAD Modernization projects were kept small, short and focused. This also helped to contain the risk. Finally, we made sure not to over promise. The goal was to get the department on a path to success, not to deliver a miracle. Together, we developed a deployment strategy and a training plan that was tailored to the department’s specific requirements.

Project Management PlanProjects rarely fail due to our inability to solve technical problems; projects fail due to misaligned expectations. Preparing, communicating, and managing the plan are all mechanisms to communicate with customers. “Working the plan” means making constant adjustments based on developments along the way.

For LADOT, although we initially developed a detailed work breakdown structure and schedule for all projects, the reality turned out to be different. Given LADOT’s work load, and the effects of the economic downturn (for example, the introduction furlough days), a number of our planning assumptions were proven to be wrong. This lead us to adopt a different planning approach, whereby we prioritized projects, planned to deliver them in tandem, and adopted a planning horizon of only 6 to 8 weeks out. Trying to forecast activities any further into the future proved to be fruitless.

In classical project management, this type of planning is sometimes called Rolling Wave Planning because it acknowledges the fact that we can see more clearly what is in close proximity, and looking further ahead our vision becomes less clear. We can create well-defined work breakdown structures for that period of clarity, and highlight milestones for the rest of the project. Moving the project forward in this manner allowed LADOT to absorb the changes inherent in the CAD Modernization Program and helped the management committee incrementally overcome their fear of the change.

Change Management PlanOnce you start a project, you manage that project’s scope. “Scope Creep” is a real challenge with implementation projects, and can sometimes lead to project failure, again, due to misaligned expectations.

For the CAD Modernization Program, K-TEK implemented formal Change and Decision Management practices in order to address scope creep.

The intent of any Change Management process is to standardize and properly document any change request that could alter the project scope. The process applies to adding or modifying tasks as documented in the Scope of Work, as well as changes that affect project cost or schedule. One example of a Change Request, for LADOT was the additional requirement to “Migrate Signal and Geo Data” from the existing tracking system to the new Project Tracking System. The original scope did not consider data migration.

Decision Management PlanA Decision Request, on the other hand, was the mechanism used to focus attention, gather information, reach timely closure on critical decisions needed, and document those decisions. An example of a

16


Decision Request was the requirement to “Document the decision regarding LADOT’s Approach for CAD Management.”

K-TEK and the department agreed that they would assign CAD Manager responsibilities to a team of senior Engineers. We identified the risk of not managing CAD standards to be that individuals would make their own improvements over time, and productivity gains associated with consistency in CAD standards might be lost.

Unlike Change Requests, Decision Requests do not have a direct impact on project scope, although their impact can be greater in the long term. The Decision Request just described does not impact project scope. It does have a long term impact on the success of the overall program, however. Getting the management committee to formally authorize CRs and DRs, with wet-ink signatures, helped ensure that the management committee understood the implications of those changes and decisions, and agreed with the recommended plan of action.

Communications Management PlanA communications plan ensured a common understanding of project needs and commitments between LADOT and K-TEK. We defined, up front, how the team would communicate about all aspects of the project.

We conducted an initial program kick off meeting, including end users, to outline the seven projects, and the vision for the future. In addition to weekly, internal K-TEK status meetings, Monthly Management Committee meetings were conducted to discuss status, delivery dates, action items, CRs, DRs, risks. Newsletters were prepared by K-TEK, and distributed to department personnel by the Management Committee. The newsletters provided end users with a status update. End users knew changes were coming many months before their daily routines were affected; thus, they were prepared for the change. This type of communication was important because it gave users a sense of ownership and involvement and increased the chance of success.

Success MetricsOne way to overcome the fear of change is to demonstrate that the change was successful. K-TEK developed a Success Metrics and Monitoring Plan to measure whether the CAD Modernization program was successful.

The purpose of the Metrics and Monitoring Plan was to: • Implement processes for continuous improvement• Identify gaps in knowledge and the need for additional training• Measure efficiency gains over time• Aid in confirming whether staffing levels are appropriate• Measure the effectiveness of the program

The best way to verify LADOT’s satisfaction with the project was to refer to the program components, discussed previously and ask if they were met.

17


We took the time to learn about the DOT, so we were able to talk their language, and have a better understanding of their pain points. All of this allowed us to make deposits to what I call the “trust bank account” and it established K-TEK as a trusted advisor.

Training GoalsAs you recall from the first Learning Objective, one of the critical success factors was associated with Training. The department wanted to ensure that everyone was trained on and was using Standards, Processes, and Tools, including 3rd party consultants. The goal was that staff would be easily trained, resulting in groups performing their design work in a more consistent fashion.

Training RecommendationsBased on direction from the DOT, K-TEK recommended that a hybrid training approach be used that primarily relied on web-based training materials, rather than instructor-led training.

The hybrid training included the following:

Introductory meetings and notifications: Whenever a new training module or set of modules was ready to be rolled out, end user meetings were held. These meetings were not intended as training sessions, but instead as an initial opportunity to introduce end users to the new technology and the associated training material. During each session, a short presentation was given on the new CAD technology or process being introduced, along with details on what web-based training was available. In addition, an announcement was provided to tell end users other relevant information about the upcoming web-based trainings.

Web-based training content: Once new CAD Modernization technology was ready, a set of web-based training modules was created to explain to end users everything they needed to know to take full advantage of the technology. These training modules were broken into on-line books, chapters, and pages, and were accessible through a standard interface that was introduced and explained in the Introductory Meetings. The web-based training content included the following elements:

• Logical structure: Courses were broken into the on-line equivalent of books, chapters, and pages. • State-of-the-art video: All lessons used modern video technology that combined conceptual

slides, software screen captures, highlights and animation, synchronized voiceover, and instructor video. Conceptual lessons (explaining why things work a certain way) included the instructor video superimposed over the slides or software screens to maximize student attention.

• Learning checks: Learning checks and quizzes were available on-line to students at the end of each module or lesson. These included a variety of multiple choice, multiple response, match correct answers, graphics selection, and other modern on-line quiz tools. When a student was satisfied with his results, he could submit (by pressing a button) the results to his manager.

Training Recommendations AdvantagesThe advantages of this approach over traditional, instructor-led classroom training were as follows:

• The introductory meetings quickly got everyone the information they needed to begin training, while having a minimum impact on staff workload and schedule.

• The on-line trainings allowed staff to schedule training when time was available, and avoid impacting critical project deadlines.

18


• There was no issue of “missing” the training, because the content was available at any time.• New staff could take training on any subject immediately, therefore becoming productive on new

technology quickly and efficiently.• The on-line material was always available as reference for staff to review. This was especially

useful for refreshing skills that were less frequently used.• The approach for learning checks allowed students to submit results when they were comfortable.• Web-based training set the stage for the department to identify knowledge gaps and understand

where to focus further training to help the staff achieve the potential within the CAD Modernization program.

SummaryIn summary, what is needed to successfully overcome organizational inertia and fear of change? We used a structured approach to manage customer expectations, requiring customer's wet-ink signature for each task order. We avoided risk by steering clear of a big bang approach, instead breaking tasks down into manageable bites. And, we kept the plan flexible in order to accommodate the DOT's constantly changing environment.

List the value, key features and functions in Autodesk products to modernize an organization and make it more efficient

In the last Learning Objective we looked at the Solve Phase in terms of how we managed the project. In this Learning Objective we will look at the Solve Phase in terms of technology.

Project and Document Management ProjectThe Project and Document Management CAD Modernization project was focused on tracking design projects and drawings and associated documents. By implementing Project and Document Management, the department would realize a number of benefits as follows:

Save Staff and Management Time: By implementing easy, reliable, and trusted project tracking, the staff and management teams would save time.

Timely Status Information due to Simpler Update Process: If the process to update project status data was made sufficiently easy, then updates would be made in a timely fashion, allowing management to track project status and provide near-real time information to others.

Elimination of File Naming Issues: While the current naming strategy worked reasonably well, there were issues that could be resolved by better naming. And, eliminating these issues would facilitate using file names in the tracking system. Improved document naming and linkages would reduce the time required to search for and access documents.

Efficient Document Access: The plan was to extend the Existing Custom Tracking System to service all groups within the department. This included expanding it to handle all projects within the CAD environment, addressing file referencing and naming, and providing more effective ways for everyone to use the tool. In the process, we intended to create custom extensions that would work within AutoCAD® and provide some level of document management.

19


Tracking System Platform EvaluationDuring the Planning phase, at the DOT’s request, we estimated the Expanded Tracking System labor requirements assuming that their programmer would be involved throughout the design and development process. This custom option had a number of inherent weaknesses:

• There would be a high level of dependency on the Department’s programmer who created the original tracking system.

• The Existing Custom Tracking System had a relatively superficial integration with AutoCAD®.• Little or no document management capability could be provided without additional customization.

Department Developer Availability LimitationsAt the beginning of the CAD Modernization implementation phase, the department informed K-TEK that, as a result of the economic downturn, their programmer would not be made available to the project, and that the overall contract value would not be increased. This created a dilemma. The solution was Autodesk Vault Workgroup!

In the process of researching the requirements in further detail, we learned that Vault Workgroup had evolved to a point where it was well suited for general-purpose CAD applications, and could provide both document management and status tracking. Vault also requires different skill sets and implementing it would be less reliant upon the department’s programmer.

Tracking System RequirementsThe Tracking System Requirements were grouped as shown:

System Related Requirements: The first requirement was to implement a single Tracking System usable by all design groups, that would rely on a single database located on a server and would leverage commercial off-the-shelf software. The system would have a high average up time and would be designed to be automatic and scalable without changes being necessary.

Access Related Requirements: Any user would be able to access tracking data and make updates from inside or outside the CAD environment. Information would be accessible across groups, helping increase coordination and reduce duplication. Access to the System would be controlled so that individuals would have easy access to information they need but not make inappropriate changes or view data they were not authorized to view.

Process Related Requirements: The Tracking System must allow for variances and not force users into a specific process. It would support tracking of projects with 3rd party involvement and would support the formal design process, and be aware of the stage of a project. When one step in the process is complete, it would automatically notify the individual responsible for the next step in the process. This is what we call “ball in court” functionality.

Document Related Requirements: The tracking system would provide automatic versioning and, it would provide a means to locate documents and drawings based on location, date, or other search criteria. The system would facilitate storage and management of any design documents, such as:

• CAD documents• Work orders

20


• Site photos• And other documents

Operational Requirements: Ideally the Tracking System would require little or no department staff time for day-to-day operations or for system maintenance. It would be designed so that changes could be made by staff without special software programming training.

Reporting and Output Requirements: The Tracking System would provide basic statistics on average project and element times and would support reporting of forecast vs. actual time for project stages. Also it would provide information on a project’s current status, assigned resources, document status, anticipated completion dates, next steps, etc.

Autodesk® Vault WorkgroupUnderstanding the requirements, and being able to map them to the key features and functions of Autodesk Vault Workgroup, lead K-TEK to recommend adopting it as the foundation of the Tracking System.

Less Programming: Autodesk Vault Workgroup met a majority of the requirements with a minimum of custom programming, reducing the contract programmer’s time from the original estimate of 70 days to 15 days.

Lower risk: As a commercial product, the department would gain more functionality with considerably lower risk, both in terms of initial development and ongoing support costs.

Administer without a programmer: Vault has built in administration features that make it easier to manage and maintain the Tracking System going forward, eliminating the current risk and dependency on a programmer to add users, and so forth.

Faster deployment: A Vault-based solution can be configured and deployed in a matter of weeks, not months.

Vault license and subscription fees: One consequence of using Vault was the additional software licensing fees and ongoing subscription fees.

Higher server storage requirements: Finally, because Vault can track design file versions, it inherently uses more server storage space than the department’s current configuration. Fortunately, additional space was allocated by another unit within the department that supported Vault requirements.

SummaryIn this Learning Objective we looked at the Solve Phase in terms of technology and in working with the department it became clear that an improved Tracking System was a key to efficient and modern operations. K-TEK’s approach of leveraging Autodesk Vault Workgroup helped achieve these goals.

Conclusion

In this class we covered the following Learning Objectives:

21


Describe techniques to get a "big picture" view of an organization's CAD design needs Identify methods to define a complex project with multiple deliverables Articulate what is needed to successfully overcome organizational inertia and fear of change List the value, key features and functions in Autodesk products to modernize an organization and

make it more efficient

Now you know how we, K-TEK Solutions, U.S. CAD and DLT Solutions, were able to overcome the challenges of this complex program and:

• get a "big picture" view of LADOT’s CAD design needs• define and scope the project including multiple deliverables • overcome the DOT’s organizational inertia and fear of change • show the DOT how to utilize key features and functions in Autodesk products to modernize their

organization

22