Agile project management in heavy engineering design (John Underhill, Babcock)
•Transferir como PPT, PDF•
1 gostou•2,788 visualizações
John Underhill presents on implementing agile project management processes for heavy engineering design projects at Babcock International Group. He discusses adopting agile techniques like sprints and prioritizing highest risks to better manage uncertainty, scope changes, and measure progress. Key aspects of their approach include identifying risks each sprint to focus resources, maintaining a task list to track progress, and using metrics like a "saw tooth" graph to demonstrate risk reduction over time. Initial results show benefits like empowered teams, informed stakeholders, faster decisions, and assurance of steady design progress.
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Destaque
Destaque (20)
Semelhante a Agile project management in heavy engineering design (John Underhill, Babcock)
Semelhante a Agile project management in heavy engineering design (John Underhill, Babcock) (20)
Mais de Association for Project Management
Mais de Association for Project Management (20)
Último
Último (20)
Agile project management in heavy engineering design (John Underhill, Babcock)
- 1. Agile Project Management in Heavy Engineering Design John Underhill Main presentation title Babcock International Group can sit on two lines Project Manager – Product Design, Weapon Handling and Launch With a further description underneath 1 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 2. Agenda • Context • What • Why • When • Who • How • What are we learning? Main presentation title • Questions can sit on two lines With a further description underneath 2 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 3. Marine and Technology • • • • Provide high integrity mechanical & electrical engineered systems for defence customers worldwide Provide solutions to difficult challenges ref design, analysis & production. Deliver high-criticality and –integrity systems & equipment Core products Include: – Submarine Weapons Handling & Launch Systems (WHLS) – Towed Submarine Communication & Array Systems – Surface ship munitions handling equipment • Main presentation title can sit on two lines 30 years experience as the design authority for WHLS to the UK MoD With a further description underneath 3 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 4. Torpedo Launch Video to insert here Source: YouTube Main presentation title can sit on two lines With a further description underneath 4 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 5. Weapon Handling and Launch Main presentation title can sit on two lines With a further description underneath 5 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 6. Why do we want to implement agile processes? that System and Design Definition phases are full of • We recognised uncertainty • We wanted to focus more on the highest risks first • We needed to better measure our progress within these phases • We needed to manage scope change (creep) • We need to forecast our ETC better • We needed to be able to focus appropriate resources to appropriate tasks, whether they be in our direct sphere of influence or not • We needed to convince not only our customers that we were making progress, but ourselves as well – i.e. provide the assurance Main presentation title can sit on two lines With a further description underneath 6 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 7. What did we aim to achieve? At the heart of our aims for the System and Design definition phases is to develop… •…a process for tackling the most difficult challenges first •…a methodology that could better cope with the emergent issues of a complex hardware design •…a methodology for measuring and recording progress of an evolving project •…a process that maintained focus on the ultimate deliverables but also encouraged creative design •…a culture that critically reviews, plans and monitors change Main presentation title can sit on two lines With a further description underneath 7 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 8. Our Agile approach Our Agile approach is characterised by the following activities in each defined period cycle, each cycle being termed as a “sprint”: •Each sprint shall be a 1 month, task orientated design activity that answers specific questions, queries and/or risks established in the previous sprint •Reviews and records the design decisions and answers provided by the work carried out by all appropriate stakeholders •Identification and Risk categorisation (high, medium or low) of the questions, queries and risks that have arisen during the sprint phase and how they align with the overall project risks and requirements •Agreement from all stakeholders of the next highest priority queries, risks and/or questions to be answered in the next iterative sprint Main presentation title can sit on two lines •The number of sprints is determined by the overall project schedule, but the amount of risk that can be reduced by the end of all sprints remains indeterminate – however progress to date is very positive. With a further description underneath 8 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 9. Our Techniques for our approach • • • The sprints will be built into the Product Teams delivery schedule, the tasks being recorded within the schedule All the tasks that are to be done are recorded in the Master Task List. Each of the tasks have the following recorded against them – – – – • • • An owner Estimated hours Technical risk level (1 [low] to 5) Due date Task register ranks to the tasks as a function of Technical risk and the due date – we call it the “Overall Risk Weighting” As new tasks are added to the list, the total count of tasks will rise; completed tasks will be marked as such The resulting metric is the saw tooth graph Main presentation title can sit on two lines With a further description underneath 9 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 10. Master Task list ID Task 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Notes / Comments Suitability of S80 Rammer for JBIII (2400kg vs 2000Kg, Angles) Re-use of existing Contract Drawings numbers, or all new? Tube loading loads Alignment of CLL Alignment of the system to the Boat and to Discharge equipment Jacking System Establish Stack Height Layout Establish Fore/Aft layout (Required for SDR) WSE SDR Familiarisation with Project (AJV, ANP) Loadlines Cradles for loading or Trolleys Review Risk Registers Machining Limitation for Structure Tube Loading Return Track Route Confirm mount arrangement with Sociotec Lower Tier Modular Build - improve on S80 Interlock Map - has this been produced? Agree Sub system Specs WSE DDR - Customer Draft Submittal WSE Internal DDR CLL DDR Embarkation DDR WSE DM6 deliverables WSE DM7 deliverables WSE Structure Internal DDR WSE Traversing Internal DDR WSE Loading Internal DDR WSE Loose Item Stowages Internal DDR WSE Jacking Internal DDR WSH1D016587, …16589, …16588 Can we machine a structure that big? 1 week allocated Input into WSE Owner Technical Risk Est. hours Project (1 (low) to 5 milestone (high)) date WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE HYD WSE WSE WSE CLL WES WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE WSE 4 3 4 5 4 5 4 4 3 5 3 5 3 3 4 2 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 80 24 80 30 120 120 40 40 40 60 80 20 10 30 16 40 30 24 40 40 40 40 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 Project Milestone description Required By… Hours to Estimated Del'v'y risk "Required latest start weighting, by" date date 0 = lowest Overall Risk Weighting 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 442413.39 159.92 148.41 148.41 592.61 1202604.28 0.00 0.00 115.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 104.57 104.93 0.00 0.00 114.29 105.99 105.64 105.39 106.16 105.42 111.59 55 20 55 148 24154953 23734 8103 8103 11903 178482301 20 148 2328 20 55 7 55 55 284 285 3 3 311 288 287 286 289 287 303 27/05/2013 16/07/2013 20/05/2013 20/05/2013 01/06/2013 14/05/2013 30 296 -7 -7 59 -52 02/05/2013 21/06/2013 10/05/2013 10/05/2013 24/05/2013 01/05/2013 20/09/2013 651 18/09/2013 18/07/2014 Draft Submittal 18/07/2014 18/06/2014 2242 2079 10/07/2014 10/06/2014 17/10/2013 Draft Submittal 18/04/2014 Draft Submittal Internal DDR Internal DDR Internal DDR Internal DDR Internal DDR 792 1761 1865 1946 1717 1939 955 02/10/2013 03/04/2014 23/04/2014 09/05/2014 26/03/2014 07/05/2014 01/11/2013 17/10/2013 18/04/2014 08/05/2014 24/05/2014 10/04/2014 22/05/2014 18/11/2013 Main presentation title can sit on two lines With a further description underneath 10 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 11. The Priority Pivot Table Owner WSE Row Labels Familiarisation with Project (AJV, ANP) Alignment of the system to the Boat and to Discharge equipment Jacking System Delivery of SDR Establish Stack Height Layout Establish Fore/Aft layout (Required for SDR) Machining Limitation for Structure WSE DM6 deliverables WSE Jacking Internal DDR WSE Loading Internal DDR WSE DM7 deliverables WSE Structure Internal DDR WSE Loose Item Stowages Internal DDR WSE Traversing Internal DDR WSE Internal DDR WSE DDR - Customer Draft Submittal Alignment of CLL Review Risk Registers Confirm mount arrangement with Sociotec Suitability of S80 Rammer for JBIII (2400kg vs 2000Kg, Angles) Tube loading loads Agree Sub system Specs Tube Loading Return Track Route Loadlines Cradles for loading or Trolleys Re-use of existing Contract Drawings numbers, or all new? Lower Tier Modular Build - improve on S80 Grand Total Max of Required By… Sum of Est. hours Sum of Overall Risk Weighting 14 May 13 60 178,482,301 27 May 13 120 24,154,953 16 Jul 13 120 23,734 01 Jun 13 40 11,903 20 May 13 40 8,103 20 May 13 40 8,103 20 Sep 13 10 2,328 17 Oct 13 80 311 18 Nov 13 80 303 10 Apr 14 80 289 18 Apr 14 80 288 08 May 14 80 287 22 May 14 80 287 24 May 14 80 286 18 Jun 14 40 285 18 Jul 14 40 284 30 148 20 148 16 55 80 55 80 55 24 55 30 20 80 20 24 20 40 7 18 Jul 14 1494 202,694,627 Refresh Pivot Table Main presentation title can sit on two lines With a further description underneath 11 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 12. The Saw Tooth Metric Hard milestone! Main presentation title can sit on two lines With a further description underneath 12 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 13. What are we learning • The “macro” risks to the project are consistent, it is the perceived “micro” risks that evolve rapidly • Focusing engineering effort at the micro level (sprints) leads to solving the macro level issues • The Agile approach highlights constraints (distractions) that very often the Project Manager can control/manage (away) • The engineering teams are/feel empowered and are delivering to schedule • The Chief Engineering team are/feel informed at regular intervals – there are no Technical surprises – issues raised and dealt with as they occur • Our customers (internal and external) can have regular status updates of the design, and understand their inputs and when they are required • Drumbeat reviews makes for faster decision making Main presentation title can sit on two lines • The saw tooth has become blunt very fast! • The process is providing assurance With a further description underneath 13 of 14 UID SH1300306205
- 14. Questions? Main presentation title can sit on two lines With a further description underneath 14 of 14 UID SH1300306205
Notas do Editor
- Context – Who and what does Babcock do, what I mean by Heavy engineering What – What design work are we talking about Why – Learning from previous contracts and the desire to do it better When – a brief description of where we are with ou Who – the stakeholders in this new approach How – some of the techniques we have applied to implement our agile approach What are we learning – a summary of the things we have discovered to date
- Approximate length of the stowage – 10 metres, 3 metres wide per stowage
- So taking the “why” we boiled this down into some specific aims. Point 1 – self explanatory Point 2 – It was perceived that there where lots of emergent issues that needed to be dealt with Point 3 – Previous experience had shown that some form of tighter control was required in the System Design and Design Definition Phases Point 4 – It was felt form the Project Mgmt community that the engineers had been distracted from delivering the benefits of the projects, often by hearsay or potential changes Point 5 – The previous point leads into the next. The critically review part of this headline is very about the Project Mgmt community reviewing any changes before it reaches the engineering teams at the coalface. This prevents that perceived distraction. But for those changes that are to be realised, they must be properly recorded, planned and monitored
- First point out that I am not a Agile expert or Scrum master. Our approach is based on the reading around the subject and applying some of those techniques, not necessarily in the “text book” manner. Sprint period of 1 month – decided in agreement with the engineering teams Records of the sprint reviews are kept Identification and risk category applied by the engineering teams themselves so they are bought into the decision. It is the project mgmt teams role to bring the understanding of the overall delivery plan and schedule to “keep the engineering teams honest” By setting the sprints at 1 month intervals, there are only a finite number of sprint phases we can go through before DDR. It therefore gives the project management team the understanding of how progress is being made relative to the time remaining. The amount of risk exposure remains indeterminate – however, as the DDR deadline approaches we can clearly identify those outstanding issues that can be dealt with. Not all issues have to be dealt with; with the agreement of the Chief Engineers agreement some issues can be dealt with during normal business as part of the Production definition phase. This is fundamental to the control of scope gong into the DDR – it also means that there are no technical surprises for the technical council during the design review.
- So how did we implement the vision and what tools did we use… These are the headline topics and the following slides will show the practical examples.
- This is a list of all tasks across all sub systems. The tasks are not sorted into any kind of order at this point, this is the data gathering point. So we have the Tasks title…named by the engineering teams.
- Things to note – The prioritisation table shown is for one team. There are 5 teams within our direct sphere of influence. But there are also priority lists for the other stakeholders. That can include our customers (Project Teams), Analysis teams, Test teams etc.