• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Solomon.paul
 

Solomon.paul

on

  • 10,244 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
10,244
Views on SlideShare
10,244
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
27
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Solomon.paul Solomon.paul Presentation Transcript

    • Integrating Technical Performance with Earned Value Management Paul Solomon, PMP Performance-Based Earned Value® www.PB-EV.com paul.solomon@pb-ev.com NASA PM Challenge 2011 Long Beach Feb. 9, 2011 © Copyright 2010, Paul Solomon 1Used with permission
    • Agenda• Link EV to Technical Performance/Quality• Government Needs and Acquisition Reform• Guidance in Standards and Models• Practical Application• EVM Acquisition Reform © Copyright 2010, Paul Solomon 2
    • Does EVMS Really Integrate? EVMS COST SCHEDULE WBS TECHNICALPERFORMANCE RISK Progress Plan Risk Profile 100 1 © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 3
    • Value of Earned Value“EVM data will be reliable and accurate only if:• The right base measures of technical performance are selected and• Progress is objectively assessed” (a)(a) “Integrating Systems Engineering With Earned Value Management”in Defense AT&L Magazine, May 2004 © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 4
    • Government Needs andAcquisition Reform © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 5
    • Office of Management and Budget• Circular No. A-11, Section 300 Planning, Budgeting, Acquisition and Management of Capital Assets • Section 300-5 • Performance-based acquisition management • Based on EVMS standard • Measure progress towards milestones • Cost • Capability to meet specified requirements • Timeliness • Quality © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 6
    • DOD EVM ReportReport: DoD Earned Value Management: Performance, Oversight, and Governance (1) ”Utility of EVM has declined to a level where it does not serve its intended purpose.”Findings and Recommendations:• Inaccurate EVM status data provided by vendors• Use Technical Performance Measures (TPM)• Integrate Systems Engineering (SE) with EVM(1) Required by Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act (WSARA) 7
    • DoD Report : TPM (1 of 2)Use TPMs• EV process is reliable and accurate only if – TPMs are identified and associated with completion of appropriate work packages – Quality of work must be verified – Criteria must be defined clearly and unambiguously 8
    • DoD Report : TPM (2 of 2)Use TPMs• If good TPMs are not used: – Programs could report 100 % of earned value..even though behind schedule • Validating requirements • Completing the preliminary design • Meeting weight targets • Delivering software releases that meet the requirements• Program Managers ensure that the EVM process measures the quality and technical maturity of technical work products instead of just the quantity of work performed 9
    • H.R. 5136, National Defense Authorization ActPassed by House, on Senate calendar:• Sec. Def. to review defense acquisition guidance, including DoDI 5000.02 – Consider “whether measures of Quality and technical performance should be included in any EVMS.” – Submit report to the House and Senate • Changes in acquisition guidance • Actions to implement changes.Reference: Article in Defense AT&L Magazine, Nov./Dec. issue: EVM Acquisition Reform 10
    • EVMS Quality GapEVMS Standard, Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and NASA FAR Supplement are deficient:No guidance or requirement to link • Reported EV with • Progress toward meeting Quality/technical performance requirements © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 11
    • EVMS Quality Gap QualityEVMS Standard shortfall (3.8): Gap• “EV is..measurement of quantity of work”• “Quality and technical content of work performed are controlled by other means” !? © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 12
    • EVMS Quality GapEVMS Standard shortfall (Guideline 2.2b):Identify (ID)• physical products• milestones• technical performance goals“or” Quality• other indicators Gap that will be used to measure progress. “or” not “and” © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 13
    • Guidance inStandards and Models © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 14
    • Guidance in Standards and Models• Processes for Engineering a System (ANSI/EIA-632)• Standard for Application and Management of the SE Process (IEEE 1220)• Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI®) • CMMI for Development, Version 1.2 • CMMI for Acquisition, Version 1.2 • Using CMMI to Improve Earned Value Management , 2002• Guide to the Project Management Institute Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide®), 4th Edition © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 15
    • CMMI: Requirements Management SG 1 Manage Requirements SP 1.2 SP 1.4 SP 1.5 Obtain Maintain bi- Identify commitment directional inconsistencies: to traceability: •Requirements requirements •Requirements •Plans •Plans •Work products •WorkTypical Work Products: products• Documented com-ments to requirements Subpractices: and requirements Typical Work Products: Identify changes that need to be made to the plans and work products changes. • Requirements resulting from changes to the requirements baseline traceability matix © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 16
    • PMBOK Quality Baseline Guidance• Establish a quality baseline as part of the Performance Measurement Baseline (8.1.3.5) – Integrate technical and quality objectives (10.3.1.5) 17
    • Product Requirements Baseline • CMMI®, PMBOK Guide® : Traceability and consistency Requirements Work •Project Plans Task 1 Product Require- Task 2 ments Task 3 Baseline •Activities •Work ProductsSource: CMMI Requirements Management Process Area (PA), Specific Practice (SP) 1.5 © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 18
    • CDR Success CriteriaIEEE 1220, (6.6): Success Criteria (CDR)• Design solution meets: – Allocated performance requirements – Functional performance requirements – Interface requirements – Workload limitations – Constraints – Use models and/or prototypes to determine success 19
    • Requirements and Product MetricsIEEE 1220 EIA-6326.8.1.5 Performance-based 4.2.1 Req. 10: Progressprogress measurement against requirements 6.8.1.5 d) Assess Assess progress …• Development maturity • Compare system definition• Product’s ability to satisfy against requirementsrequirements a) Identify product metrics6.8.6 Product metrics at and expected valuespre-established control points:  Quality of product• Evaluate system quality  Progress towards• Compare to planned goals and satisfying requirementstargets d) Compare results against requirements © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 20
    • PMBOK TPM Guidance• Technical performance measurement compares technical accomplishments during project execution to the … schedule of technical achievement.• It requires definition of objective, quantifiable TPMs which can be used to compare actual results against targets (11.6.2.4). 21
    • Practical Application © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 22
    • TPM• How well a system is achieving performance requirements• Use actual or predicted values from: – Engineering measurements – Tests – Experiments – Prototypes• Examples: – Payload – Response time – Range – Power – Weight © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 23
    • TPM Performance vs. Baseline Planned Value Profile Tolerance Band Achieved To Date TechnicalTechnical VariancePerformanceValue,e.g. weight Planned Value Goal Milestones Time © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 24
    • Example 1: EV Based on Drawings and TPMs• SOW: Design a subsystem with 2 TPMs: – Maximum (Max.) weight • Planned Value (PV): 200 lb. (May) – Max. diameter • PV: 1 inch (when 80% drawings complete, April)• Enabling work products: 50 drawings• BAC: 2000 hours – Drawings: 40 hours/drawing @ 50 2000 – If TPM PVs not met on schedule: • Negative adjustment to EV – Weight: -100 – Diameter -200 © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 25
    • Example 1: EV Based on CUs and TPMsSchedule Total Jan Feb Mar Apr May Total DrawingsDrawings/ period 50 8 10 12 10 10 50Meet requirements:Weight 1Diameter 1 © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 26
    • Example 1: StatusDate April 30 May 31Drawings 41 49completedWeight met No NoDiameter met Yes Yes © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 27
    • Example 1: EV Based on Drawings and TPMsDesign Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Total(drawings)Planned 8 10 12 10 10 50drawings curPlanned 8 18 30 40 50drawings cumBCWS cur 320 400 480 400 400 2000BCWS cum 320 720 1200 1600 2000 2000Actual drawings 9 10 10 12 8completed curActual drawings 9 19 29 41 49completed cumEV (drawings) 360 760 1160 1640 1960cumNegative EV 0 -100Reqs cumNet EV cum 360 760 1160 1640 1860 1860 SV = - 140 © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 28
    • Example 1: Variance AnalysisMay variance analysis (drawings and requirements):• 1 drawing behind schedule - 40• Diameter requirement met - 0• Weight requirement not met: - 100Schedule variance - 140 © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 29
    • EVM Acquisition Reform 30
    • Acquisition Tips• Require SE and TPM best practices in Request for Proposal• Confirm contractor’s proposal includes integration of SE work products and TPMs with EVM• Verify integration in Integrated Baseline Review (IBR)• Confirm achievement of success criteria in technical reviews• Monitor consistency and validity of status reports, variance analyses, EAC31 © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon
    • Benefits of Closing EVMS Quality Gap• PMB includes technical/quality parameter• Valid contract performance reports – Objective technical/schedule status – Credible EAC• Early detection of problems – Program performance – EV measurement and compliance © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 32
    • Resources Online DOD SEI NAVAIR DOD PMI College of Performance Mgt.,ICFAI U. “Measurable News”Press, India © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 33
    • Questions?Comments? © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 34
    • References® CMMI Is Registered by Carnegie Mellon University in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.® Performance-Based Earned Value is registered by Paul Solomon in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. PBEV is a service mark of Paul Solomon.® PMBOK is registered by the Project Management Institute in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office• American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/Electronics Industries Alliance (EIA). ANSI/EIA 632, Processes for Engineering a System, EIA, Arlington, VA, 1998.• CMMI®, Capability Maturity Model Integration for Development, Version 1.2, 2006.• CMMI, CMMI for Acquisition, Version 1.2, 2007.• CMMI, Using CMMI to Improve Earned Value Management, 2002• Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). IEEE Std 1220TM-2005, IEEE Standard for Application and Management of the Systems Engineering Process. New York, 2005. © Copyright 2009, Paul Solomon 35