Upload
diane-barber
View
214
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
CCA LSS Team #2Post Implementation Review (PIR)
Kick-off Meeting
13 Jan 2009
CS4 Room 310 Small
V3
Purpose of this meeting is to craft a plan for executing the
LSS project charter:
Improving Post Implementation Reviews
3
Agenda
Introduction Rick
LSS process overview Tomatra
Context Len
Charter Len
PIR information sources Len
Team roles and responsibilities
Rick
VOC Data Collection Amelia
Schedule Rick
Next Steps Rick
4
Team #2 Membership
Rick Perron (DCIO)
Len Sadauskas (DCIO)
Amelia Grazioso (DCIO)
CDR Ben Torreon (J6)
Maj Jeff Delvecchio (NII)
Neal Zank (AFCIO)
Jim Oliver (USA CIO/G6)
Core Other
Austin Huangfu (DOT&E)
TBD (PA&E)
TBD (C)
Phil Minor (NII)
John Burson (DON CIO)
5
PIR Project Context
Role of MOE and PIR in IT/NSS Investments
– CURRENT: Individual “Program” orientation
– FUTURE: Portfolio view
LSS Team deliberations resulted in two projects:
– Improving quality of outcome measures
– Improving quality and value of post implementation reviews
Scope of LSS PIR project constrained IAW charter
Next Generation Goal: Fully implement PIR planning and report data into IT/NSS Investment Lifecycle
6
LSS Methodology: Part DMAIC & Part Rapid
Improvement
DMAIC
– To address concerns that are identified during data collection
Surveys, groupware
Rapid Improvement
– Quick wins as they are identified (such as) Centralized PIR Plan and Report Repository
Clarification of policy and guidance
7
Improving Post Implementation Reviews (PIRs) PIR data
enables capability portfolio
development trend analysis
and identification
of best practices
Team MembersName Role Affiliation DACI
Rick Perron Green Belt DoD CIO Driver
Ed Wingfield Sponsor DoD CIO Approver
Tomatra Minor MBB DoD CIO Driver
TBD Process Owner CPM (?) Approver
LSS CharterProblem Statement:
PIRs are not being conducted by all MAIS and MDAP solutions for capability gaps, thereby hampering the DoD’s ability to identify and report on capability portfolio development trends and best practices.
Business Case:
Ensure that PIRs are conductedImplement standardized format PIR reportingEnable analysis of trends and identify potential capability development best practices
Unit: PIR Report
Defect: PIR not conducted, inability to conduct trend analysis and to identify best practices
Customer Specifications:
Ability to develop PIR Report trend analysis and best practice identification
Start: Receipt of PIR Plan
Stop: PIR Report issued, recipients complete analysis of trends, and best practices documented
Scope: All MDAP and MAIS under DoDI 5000.02 Table 2-1
TimelinePhase Planned Actual Status
Define 20 Jan 09 dd mm yy
Measure D + 3 weeks
dd mm yy
Analyze D+3
weeks
dd mm yy
Improve D + 7 weeks
dd mm yy
Control D + 8
Weeks
dd mm yy
Y
8
Information Sources and Collaboration
PIR guidance is in DAG Ch 7.9
Additional guidance, examples and discussion is found in IT-CoP under CCA Implementation/PIR at:
– https://acc.dau.mil/cca
MOE and PIR LSS team information is in IT-CoP:– https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=234715&lang=en-US
PIR Team collaboration options are:
– Email, IT-CoP page, DKO?
9
Proposed VOC Data Collection Method
Groupware Session – 28 January 2009 tentative; DISA Columbia Pike location
– Scope: PIRs for ACAT I programs since 2003 (JCS 3170)
– Participants: ACAT I PMOs across DoD Components, OSD + Component SMEs, and Capability Portfolio Managers
– Opportunity to: Collect data quickly and in non-attribution environment from people directly
involved with MOE-PIR Support data derived by sub-team in areas of policy, people, procedures,
data, work environment, technology (reference: MOE-PIR Cause & Effective Diagram)
Prove or disprove three hypotheses (reference: MOE-PIR Cause Affinity Diagram)
Resolve problem statement and achieve business case goals defined in PIR LSS Charter
– Desired outcome of session; i.e., what would success look like?
– Format: PIR introduction; data input to mini-survey; general discussion; present next steps (e.g., follow-up surveys, if necessary, and receive raw data for analysis)
10
Team Roles and Responsibilities
Before Project During Project After Project
Team Leader
Review draft Charter with Sponsors
Develop Charter further
Help Select Team Members
Manage schedules
Lead meetings
Coordinate communication
Liaison between coach, sponsor(s), and stakeholders
Keep records
Do team’s work
Ensure that documents are completed and lessons captured
Monitor implementation (if appropriate)
Use improved methods
Team Members Assist with team definition
and recruiting
Participate in meetings
Complete assignments
Help with team tasks and logistics
Contribute knowledge and expertise
Learn necessary methods and acquire needed skills
Use improved methods
11
Before Project During Project After Project
MBB Assist Team Leader
Help develop Charter
Provide expert guidance and coaching on skills and methods
Help team gather and interpret data
Help prepare for sponsor reviews
Provide guidance as needed
Process Owner
Reviews draft Charter with Sponsor
Approve Tollgates
Contribute knowledge and expertise
Use improved methods
Sponsor
(guidance team)
Identify goals
Select Team Leader and Members
Assign coach
Approve Draft Charter
Provide direction and guidance
Review team progress
Run interference
Control budget
Provide ongoing support for implementation
Ensure monitoring
Preserve lessons learned
Team Roles and Responsibilities
12
High-Level SIPOC
Suppliers Inputs Process Outputs Customers
Measurable Y:Measurable Y:
13
DACI Chart
D = Driver – The person who is responsible for the action/task.
A = Approver – Process owner: Responsible for area impacted by project.
C = Contributor – Who should be consulted regarding changes in the process.
I = Informed – The person(s) who is informed after performing the action/task.
Step Action/Task Driver Approver Contributor Informed
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
14
CCA LSS PIR Project Schedule
Toll Gate D M+A I C 1/12 1/19 1/26 2/2 2/9 2/16 2/23 3/2 3/9 3/16 Week
Task 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 CCA LSS Sponsor Initiation Value Chain Analysis Project Definition CCA LSS WG Review
Draft Charter
0 Kick-off Meeting X 1 Develop Survey X X 2 Collect PIR Data X X X X X 3 Plan Groupware Session X X 4 Commit Participants X X 5 Conduct Groupware Session X 6 Follow-up Surveys X X 7 Analyze Data X X 8 Confirm Charter X 9 Plan Improvement X X
10 Implement Improvement X X X X X 11 Implement Controls X X X 12 Evaluate Project Results X
15
Next Steps
Week of 1/12 & 1/19
– Amelia leads team to develop survey and plan groupware session
– Len begins collection of PIR plans and reports
– Team decides on collaboration approach
– Rick develops DACI chart and confirms schedule
– Team develops SIPOC
16
Back-up
17
PIRResults
PIR Role in Capability Based Planning CBP
18
1. Improving the Quality of Outcome Measures
TimelinePhase Planned Actual Status
Define Dec 08 dd mm yy
Measure dd mm yy dd mm yy
Analyze dd mm yy dd mm yy
Improve dd mm yy dd mm yy
Control dd mm yy dd mm yy
Having outcome
measures in place reduces
investment costs &
schedule overruns
Team MembersName Role Affiliation DACI
Ron Richardson Black Belt (C)* DoD CIO Driver
TBD Sponsor Joint Staff (?) Approver
LoraLee Kodozo MBB DoD CIO Driver
TBD Process Owner Joint Staff (?) Approver
LSS CharterProblem Statement:
A three year sampling of data of Initial Capabilities Documents (ICDs) reveals that X% (X out of Y) failed to articulate outcome measures (formerly measures of effectiveness (MOEs)) thereby increasing requirement changes that contribute to cost and schedule overruns.
Business Case:
Ability to assess mission area capabilityReduce costs associated with requirement changes due to lack of outcome measures.
Unit: Initial Capabilities Document
Defect: ICDs without capability outcome measures
Customer Specifications:
ICDs are required to have outcome measures of the desired effect needed to fill a capability gap.
Start: Submission of an ICD into the JROC Knowledge Management/Decision Support (KMDS) system
Stop: Approved ICD
Scope: New IT/NSS investments under the purview of the Logistics (L), Command & Control (C2) and Net-Centric (NC) functional capability boards (FCB).
* (C) = Candidate in Training; Not certified