Lean Aerospace Initiative
Implementing Lean PD Workshop presentationLean Aerospace Initiativ

Stanke, Alexis

DSpace@MIT

Lean Aerospace InitiativeImplementing Lean PD Workshop Best Life Cycle Value,the F/A-18E/F, andthe Lean Enterprise ModelSeptember 22, 2000Presented By:Alexis StankeMITResearch Sponsored By Lean Aerospace InitiativePD Stanke 092200-2  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyOverview Best Life Cycle Value Case Studies– Research review– Progress report– Future work PRELIMINARY findings– Mapping the F/A-18E/F practices to the Lean EnterpriseModel (LEM)PD Stanke 092200-3  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyBest Lifecycle Value Case StudiesResearch Team:Alexis Stanke LAI - PDJacob Markish LAI - PDEarll Murman LAI - PDLt Col Rob Dare LAI - AQKirk Bozdogan LAI - AQIngrid Hurme LARPGunnar Holmberg LARPPD Stanke 092200-4  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCapture enabling practices for future programs.Codify knowledge for implementation and training.Motivation Best life cycle value is a LAI Phase III research focusTwo Primary Issues: Characterization– How is best life cycle value defined for different systems? Achievement– What enabling practices and metrics contribute to achievingbest life cycle value, however it is defined?PD Stanke 092200-5  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyKey Questions How is best life cycle value defined and achieved bydifferent programs?– What are the dimensions and metrics of best life cycle value?– In what phases of the program is best life cycle value mosteffectively addressed?– What are important enabling practices and metrics for achievingbest life cycle value?– What are the barriers to improving best life cycle value in futuresystems? Is there a common best life cycle value frameworkacross different programs? How are enabling practices for achieving best lifecycle value related to the LEM?PD Stanke 092200-6  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyResearch Design Develop and test a common research methodology– Structured survey interview format– Qualitative and quantitative data collection Conduct case studies– F/A-18E/F Super Hornet (LAI)– JAS 39 Gripen (LARP)– 777 (LAI)– JPATS (LAI)– Others TBD Relate case study data to LEM Develop common life cycle value framework Vet findings Produce research productsPD Stanke 092200-7  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyMilestones June - Aug. 00– Test and refine research approach– Conduct F/A-18E/F field work (LAI) Sept. - Nov. 00– Conduct JAS 39 Gripen field work (LARP)– Develop conceptual framework for best life cycle value– Write joint LAI and LARP paper Nov. 00 - Jan. 01– 777 and JPATS field work (LAI)– Methods research with F/A-18E/F EFF program on productdevelopment processes for improving life cycle value Feb. - Mar. 01– Update framework with additional case study data– Prepare draft products for review Apr. - May 01– Complete research and productsPD Stanke 092200-8  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Candidate Frameworkfor Life Cycle ValueValueIdentification• Identify Stakeholders• Understand eachstakeholder’s valuesystem• Establish stakeholderexpectationsValueProposition• Create stakeholderalignment• Balance stakeholderexpectations• Establish clearcommunication ofbalanced expectationswith all stakeholdersValueDelivery• Create product thatmeets balancedexpectations outlinedin the value propositionand retains thesequalities throughout it’slifePD Stanke 092200-9  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyPRELIMINARY FindingsMapping the F/A-18E/F Practices to theLean Enterprise Model (LEM)PD Stanke 092200-10  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyF/A-18E/F Overview Upgraded version of F/A-18C/D– 25% larger aircraft and payload– 40% increase in unrefueled range– 3 times greater “bring back” ordnance– 5 times more survivable– Equal reliability and maintainability– Similar avionics Development costs capped at $4.88B 8.5 years from “go ahead” to IOC F/A-18E/F Enterprise– Core: NAVAIR, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, GE– Extended: Over 2500 suppliersPD Stanke 092200-11  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyScope of F/A-18E/F Study Concentration on Product Development andAcquisition– Data collection included interfaces with suppliers,production, logistics, product and business support, andprogram management– Secondary sources included production Over 80 people from 3 organizations interviewed– NAVAIR - Navy Program Office– Boeing, St. Louis - Prime Contractor– Northrop Grumman, El Segundo - Principal Sub-Contractor Attended program meetings Collected program documentation Lived the program culture during the site visits Fall 00 study of 18 month “gap” remains (LARA)PD Stanke 092200-12  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyLean Enterprise Model OverviewSupporting Practices(~300)Enabling Practices (~ 60)Metrics -Data - Barriers - InteractionsEnterprise Level MetricsMeta-Principles/Enterprise PrinciplesOverarching PracticesOptimize Capability &Utilization of PeopleContinuously Focus onthe CustomerEnsure ProcessCapability andMaturationIdentify & OptimizeEnterprise FlowImplement IntegratedProduct & ProcessDevelopmentMaintain Challenge ofExisting ProcessesMake Decisions atLowest Possible LevelPromote LeanLeadership at all LevelsAssure SeamlessInformation FlowMaximize Stability in aChanging EnvironmentDevelop RelationshipsBased on Mutual Trust &CommitmentNurture a LearningEnvironmentMetrics - Barriers - InteractionsPD Stanke 092200-13  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyBased on the structure outlined in the LEM, the SuperHornet is an example of an evolving Lean Enterprise.F/A-18E/F a Lean Enterprise ? Mapped observed F/A-18 E/F program practices toLEM Enterprise Principles, Overarching and EnablingPractices Management strategies of the F/A-18E/F programalign well with LEM principles and practices Success of the Super Hornet in achieving programgoals supports the credibility of the LEM frameworkPreliminary Conclusion:PD Stanke 092200-14  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyEnterprise Principles Right Thing at the Right Place, the Right Time, and inthe Right Quantity– Weapon system which meets and exceeds 1) technicalrequirements, 2) cost, and 3) schedule goals– F/A-18E/F changed the perspective that achieving 2 out of 3 wasgood enough– Program goals set at the contract award in 1992 were met– Philosophy that the “airplane is the boss” when trades aremade Effective Relationships within the Value Stream– Establish and maintain program credibility– Hornet Industry Team– Culture change within the organizations involved with the 18Aircraft AgreementPD Stanke 092200-15  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyEnterprise Principles cont. Continuous Improvement– Numerous program management practices introduced– Created strategies and practices that can be institutionalizedand adhered to– Program trades were made with a long-term view of the pathahead instead of looking for short-term rewards– Early success of the program has set high expectations forfuture phases Optimal First Delivered Unit Quality– OPEVAL report released in Feb. 00 with a rating of“operationally effective and suitable”– Sea Worthiness trial performancePD Stanke 092200-16  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology1:  Identify and OptimizeEnterprise Flow“Optimize the flow of products and services, either affecting orwithin the process, from concept design through point of use.” Collocation of product and people Alignment of organizational structure to the productwork breakdown structure Common CAD modeling software used across theenterprise Low Rate Expandable Tooling (LRET) minimizednumber of jigs and movements Work content in production areas is reorganized toprevent bottlenecksPD Stanke 092200-17  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology2:  Assure Seamless InformationFlow“Provide processes for seamless and timely transfer of and accessto pertinent information.” Open and honest communication– Ask for help needed Internet technology and company web sites enablesharing data and information within the enterprise– Access to data is timely and efficient– Databases are linked throughout the value chain Metrics shared weekly throughout the enterprise “Drop Dead” philosophy– Documenting your job so that someone could come in thenext day and pick it up where you left offPD Stanke 092200-18  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology3:  Optimize Capability andUtilization of People“Assure properly trained people are available when needed.” Using a production gap as an opportunity for careerand skill development programs IPT structure broadened functional responsibilities tofacilitate the development of a flexible workforce Choose the best person to solve the problem,regardless of which part of the enterprise they arefromPD Stanke 092200-19  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology4:  Make Decisions at LowestPossible Level“Design the organizational structure and management systems toaccelerate and enhance decision making at the point ofknowledge, application, and need.” Organization chart was aligned with the product workbreakdown structure to establish multi-disciplinaryteams Joint Configuration Change Board (JCCB) is anexample of how responsibility for decisions is sharedthroughout the value chain and how well-definedprocesses expedite this decision process People are empowered to make decisions throughthe flow down of requirements and metrics creatingResponsibility, Authority, and Accountability (RAA)PD Stanke 092200-20  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology5:  Implement Integrated Productand Process Development“Create products through an integrated team effort of people andorganizations which are knowledgeable of and responsible forall phases of the product’s life cycle from concept definitionthrough development, production, deployment, operations andsupport, and final disposal.” Systems engineering practices were used in productdesign Requirements were established and flowed down to theresponsible teams (RAA) Risk management process is structured and sharedthroughout the enterprise Design for manufacturing and assembly led to 42%reduction of part count over C/D– Low Rate Expandable Tooling (LRET) design and VariationSimulation Analysis (VSA)PD Stanke 092200-21  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology5:  Implement Integrated Productand Process Development cont.“Create products through an integrated team effort of people andorganizations which are knowledgeable of and responsible forall phases of the product’s life cycle from concept definitionthrough development, production, deployment, operations andsupport, and final disposal.” The capability for growth and adaptability wasdesigned in and continues to improve through theEnhanced Forward Fuselage (EFF) redesign Many stakeholders were involved in pre-contractplanning Earned Value tracking of cost and schedule metricsincorporated through the “perform to plan”philosophyPD Stanke 092200-22  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology6:  Develop Relationships Basedon Mutual Trust and Commitment“Establish stable and on-going cooperative relationships withinthe extended enterprise, encompassing both customers andsuppliers.” Program leadership emphasis on maintaining credibility Leadership brings people together and facilitates workingtogether by preventing strong personalities from takingover Labor-management partnerships are established throughHigh Performance Work Organizations (HPWO) whereissues can be worked by a team regardless of affiliation Many functions were involved in the program definitionprocess early and given an equal voice to establishcommon objectives and cooperative relationshipsPD Stanke 092200-23  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology7:  Continuously Focus on theCustomer“Proactively understand and respond to the needs of the internaland external customers.” Award fee periods each had unique criteria whichwere understood at the beginning of each period tooptimize the flexibility of the contract to changingrequirements Enterprise stakeholders worked effectively to resolveissues found during test - Integrated Test Team– Wing drop issue and solution Contractors supported customer’s requirementsdefinition process Organizational counterparts throughout theenterprise with active working relationshipsPD Stanke 092200-24  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology“Align and involve all stakeholders to achieve the enterprise’s leanvision.” Leadership alignment across enterprise Management support mentality - turn theorganization chart upside down Program management training– Boeing Program Management Best Practices– Integrated command media to describe IPT processes Activities to implement lean practices in theproduction areas8:  Promote Lean Leadership atAll LevelsPD Stanke 092200-25  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology9:  Maintain Challenges ofExisting Processes“Ensure a culture and systems that use quantitative measurementand analysis to continuously improve processes.” Cost Reduction Initiative (CRI) structure is a way togenerate, evaluate, and implement improvements Risk management process includes mitigation plansto fix problems systematically using root causeanalysis Jointly established targets for continuousimprovement are included on the 2030 roadmap,generated by the Hornet Roadmap Team using astructured QFD process Management pushed to evaluate the alternative nogrowth (in cost or weight) solution in terms of riskPD Stanke 092200-26  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology10:  Nurture a LearningEnvironment“Provide for the development and growth of both organizations’and individuals’ support of attaining lean enterprise goals.” Lessons learned databases are used to capture,communicate, and apply experience generatedlearning– Over 900 lessons learned from the A/B and C/D models wereincorporated in the E/F version Some benchmarking was done early in the program Knowledge is utilized throughout the enterpriseregardless of where it originatesPD Stanke 092200-27  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology11:  Ensure Process Capabilityand Maturity“Establish and maintain processes capable of consistentlydesigning and producing the key characteristics of the productor service.” Common databases, tools, and practices have beendefined throughout the value chain Enhanced Forward Fuselage (EFF) project is a largescale example of exploiting process maturation forcost benefit Process capability and maturity leveraged with otherprogramsPD Stanke 092200-28  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of Technology12:  Maximize Stability in aChanging Environment“Establish strategies to maintain program stability in a changingcustomer driven environment.” Program was never rebaselined Multi-year contract signed June 2000 “Perform to Plan” philosophy led directly to thenotable schedule performance of the program Maintained stable workforce capability over an 18month production gap Program was structured to absorb changes withminimal impact by using a Block upgrade strategy State of the art technology was properly judged,facilitating programming high risk developments offcritical pathsPD Stanke 092200-29  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologySummary High correlation between F/A-18E/F observedpractices and the LEM Overarching and EnablingPractices– Additional enabling practices observed– Additional LAI and LARA findings to be included Practices extended and shared throughout the 3observed organizations in the Super HornetEnterprise F/A-18E/F achieved or exceeded all program goalsPreliminary Conclusion:And the journey continues . . .Based on the structure outlined in the LEM, the SuperHornet is an example of an evolving Lean Enterprise.PD Stanke 092200-30  ©2000 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyPersonnel and ContactsProduct DevelopmentAlexis Stankeastanke@mit.eduEarll Murmanmurman@mit.eduAcquisitionRob Daredarer@mit.eduKirk Bozdoganbozdogan@mit.edu77 Massachusetts Ave.MIT 41-205Cambridge, MA 02138(617) 253-0308Fax: (617) 258-7845

Best Life Cycle Value, the F/A-18E/F, and the Lean Enterprise Model

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/1721.1/83875/1/PD2002_LEMworkshop_Stanke.pdf

Best Life Cycle Value, the F/A-18E/F, and the Lean Enterprise Model

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DSpace@MIT