This summary provides an overview of the key events and issues described in the document: 1. A Tier 1 aerospace supplier had won some large contracts and upper management was pleased with the success, planning to take advantage of reusing previous designs and analyses. However, engineering managers found themselves overwhelmed with supporting multiple programs simultaneously. 2. The narrator, a new temporary engineer, wanted to impress and learned as much as possible about the company's systems. They noticed previous analyses and documents were missing details or outdated. Presentations also lacked information needed to complete their work. 3. When trying to follow the company's processes to improve productivity, upper management resisted and reviews of the processes revealed issues. Overall communication

1. Here’sa fictional storyaboutworkat a Tier1 supplierforanaerospace OEM. (Aerospace workisheavily
regulated,andhasnumerouslevelsof oversight,alongwithtestingtoensure badthingscan’thappen,
and problemsare mitigatedanyredundancyandqualityparts.)
Work for the companyhad pickedup,andrecentlytheywonsome large contracts,as well assome
othermodestefforts.Uppermanagementwasprettyhappy,andpattedeachother’sbacks.Engineering
and assignedmanagers,acombinationof 7+ yearveterans,new engineersandahandful of older
veteranswere poisedtotake advantage of commonsystemsandLRU;s, reuse of previouswork.
Outsourcingwouldbe the keyadvantage andleverage.(0+0=0?)
Everyone theiralreadyprettymuchhad4 or more programsto support.Everyone was sobusy.Upper
managementhadachievedquitea success,andplannedtotake advantage of previousdesignsand
reuse of legacyanalyses.Tothe engineeringmanagersoutsourcedengineereffortswere paying
dividends,andknewthe systemsandLRU’salmostbetterthansome of the currentstaff.(1+1=2?)
I was newandpride myself ongettinguptospeedasfast as I can, andwantedto make a good
impression.IfeltTemporaryengineershadtoshow theirworth,and that theywere perhapsbetteror
had some otherskills,experience oreducationorcombinationthatsetthemapart.Theyeventried
harder. I learnedeverything,askingdozensof questionsformmyassociatestootherdesignengineers.
Whentime permittedIbuiltalibraryof the systems,LRU’s,and majorcomponent.Iusedall my skills
and resources,writingthingsdownandcatalogingwhateverIdid,andanalyses,specs,orrqmtsI used.
Thingswere comingalongprettygood,andI feltprettygoodhow the varioussystemsworkedandwere
similar.
Yup, analyze the designandhardware &software,look atinternal informationandinformationanddata
fromvendor/suppliers. ..We were behind.Withoutguidanceandprioritizingbymanagement,were
prettymuch paralyzedatour desks,oftenunabletoattenddailyorweeklystatusmeetings. Goodthing
as a seniorengineer,youlearnedhowtoside steppotholesand“little things”likethisdidn’tslow down
our efforts.Unfortunatelyvariousthingswere overcome byevents,some thingsunraveling,some like
Swisscheese,andworkbecame late toneed,especiallyvendordatareviews.Wasthe hardware and
designwrong,late,orhavingproblems.No.
I evenstartednoticinghowpreviousanalysestolegacysystemsandworkwere missingdetailsorwere
verylimited,letalone manywere outof date.Yup,certaincomponentslike inelectronicshad
undergone andusednewerdesignsandparts.
That’s whenInoticedthatPDR & CDR presentations( normallyagreatsource of information &helpful,
especiallyhelpfulforotherassociatedinformationthat givesyou the biggerpicture andinformation
that mightbe usedinyour workand efforts. Atfirsttheylookedlikeagreatfind.It’sthenI noticed
more missingdetailsandnotaddressingcertainCDRLrequirements.Certainlyif time permittedandno
one or managementsaid otherwise,…Icouldeasilyaddthe information.Hmmm…IeventhoughtIcould
tablelizethe currentprogramand compare itto othersimilarandlegacyprograms.That’s usually,
alwaysa goodace in the whole.(…Knowwhere you’vebeenandwhere youare going.Anddoesitmake
sense?) (2+2=4?)

2. Most companieshave processes.Strictadherence isrequired.Notsure whynoreferencestothem,or
anyone mentioningthem.Idaredpeekunderthe cover,hopingtouse them, andgetevenbetterresults
and productivitytogetmywork done. Nope,notsoeasy.Uppermanagementbalkedatusingthem
(nota good signfor the workand myself engineeringmanagementsaiditall. The glareswere almost
incendiary).Onthe side Idecideditwouldbe bettertoreview those processesandsee if theyhelped
PM’s were tuggingateveryengineertoworktheirprogram, provide status,andto ensure the workwas
gettingdone. If itwasn’t,yougot a personal visit.Meanwhile,rightafterthe PMor engineering
managerstoppedby,legacy workandsupportsuddenlypoppedup.(Where doyoufitthatin?…Oh
well,take justalittle time out,thenworkitafterregularhoursand …justdo it.) Who had the bigger
picture andalso thoughtaboutdidthe variousanalyseswe did,talkedtoone another,letalone really
(really) made sense?Reachinginside myself,Ithoughtif onlywe hadtestdata, OEM feedback,or
informationfromthe CustomerSupportGroup.Now theirsawayto gage and validate the workand
results. The silence fromengineeringmanagementwasdeafening. (3+3=6?)
…You’re in FlightTest.EveninFlightTest,thingfail andproblemsoccur.Ithappensandthat’swhat
you’re there tofix andwork out.If you’re plansfortestingfailuresare followedandcorrelatedagainst
predictions, thensurelythingswill follow minorredesigneffortsandfixes.If you’re invitedor
managementfacilitatesthese things,…great.Itdidn’thappenthatway.Leakedengineeringinformation
concerningfailures,andinquiriesfromassociatesastowhat you are goingto do,leavesyouinan
awkwardposition.Nowitfeelsmore likenoman’sland.Whatis yourjob andhow doyou addressthis,
letalone doyour jobgettingthe CDRL’sout. Afterall it’sprettymuchpaperreportsand justnumbers,
right?Dare I uncoverthe failures&lookintomatters,andtake away fromprecioustime onother
programs. Justdo your bestright?!(Afterall,noone iscomplainingaboutfailuresorsayingaircraftare
fallingfromthe sky.Youmindremindsyou,thisishow thingshave beendone foryears.) (4+4=8)
I once saw a posterwitha saying,“Once youlickthe lollipopof mediocrity,yousuckforever.“