Get documents about "W2
Shared by: qingyunliuliu
-
Stats
- views:
- 108
- posted:
- 7/27/2011
- language:
- English
- pages:
- 91
Document Sample
This week overview
Day Take-homes
Theory: Design organizations as we design
Tuesday bridges: predict, measure and manage
and “hidden” work;
Wednesday ICE
Practice: apply ICE methods and slowly
develop comfort and competence
Organization
Genentech PM
Ken Mouchka
S RG Management AEI Management
MEP, Teledata room design KPFF Product Organization Process
Task 28
SRG Lab Plan SRG Lab Task 37 Furniture Task 44 Project Mgt Task4 AEI Cor e Task 38 Task 41
Task 27
Task26 H Block Crew Task 23
SRG / AEI
Technical
Task22
AEI Core and
S RG Lab
HDCCO Costing
SRG
Technical
AEI Core
and Tech
KPFF HDCCO Core
Code Rev
Consultant
Solvent Tar ter
H Block Crew
& Tech
SRG
Landscape
Tele Data
Design
Code Rev Function: Design intent
Good self-assessed coordination between
Task 29
Design for water-free subway box for AWV neighbors, DOT, contractor, project manager Engineering designs finished by 12/31/2007
Meetings
Exchange of project documentation and
Weekly
Lab Planning P rogram
Meetings with Dir ectors
Lab Planning Program meeting with Bio
Organic
Coordination
Meeting
Genentech 80% Detailed Design
Review 80% Drawing Review
Design for structurally sound subway box specifications within 24 hours as needed Construction plans finished by 12/31/2007
Final Pr ogram Review skin changes w/db team Final Progr am
BMS Controls Meetings
(Weekly)
Confirmation w ith Officing confir mation with LAR
Project costs Organization cost Tasks to design all systems and components
Lab Planning Progr am Review 80%
Meetings w ith
Pharmacology
Lab planning Progr am Meeting with Pr otein
Chem istry
documents
Final Pr ogram
Confirmation with
Phar macology
S teel Detailing
Meetings
Tele Data Coordination Meetings
Tasks to specify all construction packages
Work Process Tasks to plan and coordinate utility movement
*Exterior
Pr ogramming
Accepted by Genentech
* Cal OSHA Recom mend
23. *Repr ogram
B#13 and B#15
24. *Complete B13,4 H
block occupancy
Determination of LFFH
Form: Design choices
Exterior Architecture r equir ements on MEP
systems (6) Coord B13 MEP
floor section Environmental impact statement Deputy project director Plan and Coordinate utility movement
26. *Finalize B#13 and
B#15
Exiting/ar chitecural H
occupancy concept
Bookend
Progr amm ing
(8) *Revise
(13,15,16) MEP specs, P&ID's,
Develop and deliver engineering design
Accepted by Genentech MEP control sequences
41. *Repr ogram
bookends B#13 and
MEP loads,
Equipment
schedules
Traffic management plan Utilities documents
finalized
B#15 Notice to proceed on
36. * Analyze
structural changes *Package B structur al
modifications (CCD3A) Relocated utilities Engineering Plan land acquisition
str uctural im pacts 22. * Com plete catw alk dr aw ings
35. *Finalize
Protein Chemistry
29. *Document
lab plan Engineering designs Urban design/Architecture Develop work packages
Pr ogram 4. com plete all Interior Architctur e 20. * Determine Scope of
18. *Detailed Lab
Program
Documentation
package D including vivar ium
changes Plan transportation access in detail throughout
32. * Finalize
Bio-Organic
Chemistry
Program G accept lab 15. Jeff r eprogram HMIS
Secant pile tunnel walls Real Estate construction
5. *Finalize lab & Equipm ent
equipment matrix
47. *Develop lab plans
33. *Finalize
LAR Pr ogram
*Lab and
vivarium
Programm ing
DD plan
Tunnel box - King to Pike Construction Engineering Develop environmental impact studies
*Turnover lab and
Com plete vivarium DD plan
34. *Finalize
Pharmacology
28. *Determine
segregation of lab
to AEI
49. Develop
reflected ceiling
Turnover
reflected
Package D and UG
addendum issued:
North section - Pike to BST Transportation Planning
and tech space Ar chitect 16. *HDCCO Deter mine underground utilities,
P rogram plan ceiling plan to
program/MEP vivar ium catwalk
Schedule Impact
44. *Complete
oncepts
Established
AEI
South Section - Holdage to King Environmental
B#14 Officing 48. * Develop exiting By Design
Planning plan Team *Notice to proceed
* 05-07-01
39. *Finalize MEP
with detailed design
*Package C
skin
modifications 14. *HDCCO update Estimate of cost
*Accept project
scope:budget
(20) Incor porate
MEP 80%Review (21-4) Finalize MEP Details, Construction plans
distr ibution and of Pr ogram by Genentech comments update specs and p&ID's
section 1. *Redesign main MEP 80% MEP r eview incor porated
distribution systems
2. Initial redesign MEP branch
lateral distribution
Issue 80%
comments
Construction staging plan
27. *Finalize B#13,
25. *Do Central Plant MEP CDs
15 Shaft Size &
MEP Room
Locations
design changes
17. * Risick
reprogr am solvent 13. *Code Consultants * City Appr oval of
10. Dr aft Alternate means
Construction packages
21. *P repar e Plan V iew s for H Concept City Appr oval of
distribution and w aste Review Concept for final
Review of Concept w /City Alternate Means
31.* AEI & city Presentation Finish
30. *Appr ove for Program Detailed Design 80 P C
42. *Develop SRG
Change to Complete
Execution Determ ine
Design
Str ategy Design $/Time 8. Review Alternate
Contract (19) Genentech review
*Design Budget &
Behavior: Analysis predictions
Impact of Means w/impact on LEL 80% drawings
Schedule for Changes and LFFH
Appr oved 53. Incor porate
com ments, complete
46. *RA Furnture 52. Finalize landscape Architectural detail
Concept Complete
Risks of leaks self-assessed stakeholder coordination quality Predicted schedule performance
3. Com plete Tele Data Design *City Accept
43. *Changes in Steel
Forw arded to Steel
Detailer s
exiting
Predicted structural deformation Predicted actor backlogs Predicted task backlogs
50. Designate size, location of G accept
40. *SRG
Reprogram 15/14
interface, exiting,
13 MEP, teledata rooms 13/14
Interface Predicted material costs Predicted actor costs Predicted task costs including material, labor
stairs
51. Designate size, location
55. KPFF design
of 14 MEP, teledata rooms G accept
15/14
Observed actor response latency
Interface
stairs for 15/14
38. *S RG
54. KPFF design
stairs for 13/14
B13 MEP HVAC,
conduit, piping mains
completed
Observed actor decision latency
Reprogram 13/14
interface, exiting,
stairs
37.
* Reprogr am
B#15 Shafts
19. *Determine ver tical
utilities
Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 1
12. *Complete UG
utiliites
45. *Complete all
Basement/LAR Draw ings
(3) *AEI design MEP
HVAC, Conduit &
23 - 24 June
piping mains B13
2009
Notices
• Today (June 23):
– Second reading assessment was due at 10
– Org models and ICE theory; ICE session
– Meet as usual: 10-12; 1-3
• June 24:
– MACDADI theory; ICE session
Meet 11:30; 3:30
– M t 10 – 11 30 1 – 3 30
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2
2009
Q1: Which of the methods below do the papers suggest might
help a p j p practice today?
p project team to develop and models in p y
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 3
2009
Q2: Which of the following statements is
true about the contents of POP models?
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 4
2009
Q3: Which of the following statements is true
Function
about “Function – Form – Behavior?
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 5
2009
Q4: Which of the following suggestions is
models?”
appropriate regarding use of POP models?
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 6
2009
Q5: Which of the following statements
breakdown structures?
are true about “breakdown structures?”
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 7
2009
Quiz – 1 point distribution
• Mean: 3.5
• SD: 1.05
Frequency
20
18
16
14
12
10
8 Frequency
6
4
2
0
0
1 12 23 34 45 5
6
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 8
2009
POP – SimVision labs
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 9
2009
POP and Sim Vision Lab
Johan Geterud
The Ten Most Important Elements Include Physical
Elements, Computer Elements and Software
, p
p
Nice use of title as annotation to explain content
6/18/2009 Stanford 11
Three Actors; Designer, Manufacturer and
Programmer,
Programmer Constitute the Organization
p
Nice use of title as annotation to explain content
6/18/2009 Stanford 12
Design, Programming and Manufacturing are
the Processes Preceeding the Assembling
p
Nice use of title as annotation to explain content
6/18/2009 Stanford 13
Conformance Objectives Reaching the
Highest Weights
Conformance to
Objectives
Notice use of annotation to explain important content
6/18/2009 Stanford 14
Project Time has the Highest Weighted Impact
Project Time
Project Time
Observed Project
Time and Backlog
Notice use of annotation to explain important content
6/18/2009 Stanford 15
Peak Predicted Scheduled Risk has the
Highest Weighted Assessment
Quality Risk 75%
Project Time
6/18/2009 Stanford 16
Evaluated Goodness Shows a Fairly Low
Meeting of Objectives
Goal . Evaluated goodness (high is good)
Evaluated Goodness
Evaluated Goodness
120
100
Evaluated goodness
80
Option 1: POP Option 2: POP V2
60
j
Meets all objectives
E
40
20
0
Evaluated goodness
Design Versions
6/18/2009 Stanford 17
Organization Consists of Three Positions Working on
Design, Manufacturing and Assembling
g , g g
Positions
Processes
6/18/2009 Stanford 18
The Project is Performed in Close To a Month
With Manufacturing Driving Most Time
Manufacturing
6/18/2009 Stanford 19
Hidden Work Ads 65% Assembling Time
Through Mainly Coordination
Hidden
Work
Notice use of annotation to explain important content
6/18/2009 Stanford 20
Big idea: “Design organizations”
If we design organizations as we design bridges, we can
predict, hidden work,
predict measure and manage “hidden” work which makes
projects late if not managed well
Product Organization Process
Function Scope (…) Design + Design + Construct
Quality (…)
y( ) Construct Cost
Cost (…) Schedule (…)
Backlog (…) Schedule risk (…)
Form Deliverables Actors Tasks
Behavior Scope Work (direct, Work (direct, hidden) volumes
Quality hidden) volumes Cost
Cost Start, Finish, Duration
Backlog Schedule i k
S h d l risk
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 21
2009
Organization Models
Models • How is this
• Organization organization “ d?”
i ti “good?”
• (Design) work • Simulation
process predictions:
Genentech PM
Organization – Gantt chart
Ken Mouchka
SRG Management AEI Management
Risks,
– Risks …
MEP, Teledata room design KPFF
Task 28 H Block Crew SRG Tele Data
Task 27 SRG / AEI AEI Core and SRG AEI Core Code Rev Code Rev
SRG Lab Plan SRG Lab Task 37 Furniture Task 44 Project Mgt Task4 AEI Core Task 38 Task 41 Task26 H Block Crew Task 23 Task22 HDCCO Costing KPFF HDCCO Core Solvent Tarter & Tech Landscape Design
Technical SRG Lab Technical and Tech Consultant
Task 29
Meetings
Weekly
Lab Planning Program meeting with Bio Genentech 80% Detailed Design
Lab Planning Program Coordination
Organic Review 80% Drawing Review
Meetings with Directors Meeting
Final Program Review skin changes w/db team Final Program
BMS Controls Meetings
Confirmation with Officing confirmation with LAR
(Weekly)
Lab Planning Program Review 80%
Meetings with Lab planning Program Meeting with Protein Final Program Steel Detailing Tele Data Coordination Meetings
documents
Pharmacology Chemistry Confirmation with Meetings
Pharmacology
Work Process
*Exterior
Programming
Accepted by Genentech
*Cal OSHA Recommend
Determination of LFFH
23. *Reprogram 24. *Complete B13,4 H
B#13 and B#15 block occupancy
Exterior Architecture requirements on MEP
systems (6) Coord B13 MEP
floor section
26. *Finalize B#13 and
B#15
Bookend
Exiting/architecural H
Programming
occupancy concept (8) *Revise (13,15,16) MEP specs, P&ID's,
Accepted by Genentech MEP
MEP loads, control sequences
Equipment
41. *Reprogram
schedules
bookends B#13 and
finalized
B#15 Notice to proceed on
structural changes *Package B structural
modifications (CCD3A)
36. *Analyze
structural impacts 22. *Complete catwalk drawings
29. *Document
35. *Finalize lab plan
Protein Chemistry
Program 4. complete all Interior Architcture 20. *Determine Scope of
18. *Detailed Lab package D including vivarium
Program changes
Documentation
32. *Finalize
Bio-Organic
Chemistry
G accept lab 15. Jeff reprogram HMIS
Program 5. *Finalize lab & Equipment equipment matrix
47. *Develop lab plans
33. *Finalize *Lab and
DD plan
LAR Program vivarium
Programming *Turnover lab and
Complete vivarium DD plan
to AEI
28. *Determine Package D and UG
34. *Finalize 49. Develop Turnover
segregation of lab addendum issued:
Pharmacology reflected ceiling reflected
and tech space Architect 16. *HDCCO Determine underground utilities,
Program plan ceiling plan to
program/MEP Schedule Impact vivarium catwalk
AEI
oncepts
44. *Complete Established
B#14 Officing 48. *Develop exiting By Design
Planning plan Team *Notice to proceed
*Package C
*05-07-01 with detailed design *Accept project
skin
39. *Finalize MEP 14. *HDCCO update Estimate of cost scope:budget MEP 80% Review (21-4) Finalize MEP Details,
modifications
distribution and by Genentech (20) Incorporate comments update specs and p&ID's
of Program
section 1. *Redesign main MEP 80% MEP review incorporated
distribution systems comments
2. Initial redesign MEP branch
lateral distribution Issue 80%
27. *Finalize B#13,
25. *Do Central Plant MEP CDs
15 Shaft Size &
MEP Room design changes
17. *Risick
Locations reprogram solvent 13. *Code Consultants *City Approval of
21. *Prepare Plan Views for 10. Draft Alternate means City Approval of
distribution and waste Review Concept for final H Concept
Review of Concept w/City Alternate Means
31.* AEI & city Presentation Finish
30. *Approve for Program Detailed Design 80 PC
42. *Develop SRG
Change to Complete
Execution Determine
Design
Strategy Design $/Time 8. Review Alternate (19) Genentech review
Contract *Design Budget &
Impact of Means w/impact on LEL 80% drawings
Schedule for Changes and LFFH
Approved 53. Incorporate
comments, complete
46. *RA Furnture 52. Finalize landscape Architectural detail
Concept Complete
3. Complete Tele Data Design *City Accept
43. *Changes in Steel
Forwarded to Steel exiting
Detailers
50 Designate size location of
50. size, G accept
40. *SRG 13 MEP, teledata rooms 13/14
Reprogram 15/14 Interface
interface, exiting,
stairs
51. Designate size, location
of 14 MEP, teledata rooms G accept
15/14
55. KPFF design
Interface
stairs for 15/14
B13 MEP HVAC,
54. KPFF design conduit, piping mains
stairs for 13/14 completed
38. *SRG
Reprogram 13/14
interface, exiting,
stairs
37.
*Reprogram
B#15 Shafts
19. *Determine vertical
utilities
12. *Complete UG
utiliites
45. *Complete all
Basement/LAR Drawings
(3) *AEI design MEP
Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 22
HVAC, Conduit &
piping mains B13
23 - 24 June
Conceptual underpinning: Model
Model
Executive
Data system
coordination
Programs PM
Redesign FRC II
for Open labs
Projects Architect, Electrical,
HVAC, Utilities EHS EORM Client
Planning security, Netw orks
Tasks SRG Architectural
Firm
Fi
Position1
Organization Start
Identify pathw ays & op
w ork zones for
data/telco system s
Define EM I separation
requirem ents
Precedence Ow ner
Coordinate MEP design w /data approval
Exception reporting
Identify pathw ays & op
w ork zones for requirem ents
HVAC/MEP system s
Coordination
Finish
Rework
g
Meetings
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 23
2009
The Challenge of Fast-Track Projects:
“Concurrent Engineering” Incurs Large Overheads
g g g
view Fast-Track Project work—Overlapped Activities
CPM View of traditional project work – Sequential Activities
Reality of fast-track project work!
Increased
Coordination
Increased
Rework
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 24
2009
Conceptual Underpinning:
Projects P I f ti
P j t Process Information
organi ation exceptions
The organization processes e ceptions
Position1
“Actors”:
Do direct
• D di t work k
• Do hidden work
• Coordinate
• Rework
• Wait
Tasks:
T k
• Have direct work
• Have hidden work
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 25
2009
Conceptual Underpinning:
Simulate Task work, Information processing:
• Model
Simulate
Si l t
Analyze, Intervene,
reanalyze Data
S W P roject
Manager
Architect
Hw Spec Availa ble
Custom er
Integration te am
UI-Analysis team representativ e
S W Design coordination
S tart1
Develop Info to Hw
specification
Im plem ent
data m odel
Im plem e nt
analys is sys te m
UI stre ss
tes t
Finish
Schedule risk
Integrate Ready for
sytem s system s test
Backlog
a na lysis s tres s
te st
S ystem s
Im plem ent UI
integration test
Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 26
Cost Risk
Fail
23 - 24 June to Hw
2009
How VDT/SimVision works D a ta s y s te m
E x e c u t iv e
c o o r d in a t io n
PM
A r c h it e c t , E le c t r i c a l ,
H V A C , U t i li t i e s EHS EO R M C li e n t
P la n n i n g s e c u r it y , N e t w o r k s
S R G A r c h it e c t u r a l
F ir m
S ta r t
I d e n t if y p a t h w a y s & o p
w o r k z o n e s fo r
d a t a /t e l c o s y s t e m s
D e f in e E M I s e p a r a t i o n
r e q u ir e m e n t s
Ow ner
I d e n t if y p a t h w a y s & o p in i
C o o r d i a t e M E P d e s ig n w / d a t a a p p ro va l
w o r k z o n e s fo r r e q u ir e m e n t s
H V A C /M E P s y s t e m s
F i n is h
• Basic simulator functions
– Entities: tasks + milestones; activities; meetings;
project
• Attributes: actor skills, task duration, task complexity, …
– Relationships:
• Responsibility (actor for task)
• Reporting (Supervisor to actor)
• Successor (task to task)
S ( k k)
• Coordination (task to task - bidirectional)
• Rework (task to task – directed)
• Stochastic Entity “Micro” behaviors
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 27
2009
E x e c u t iv e
D a ta s ys te m
c o o r d in a t i o n
PM
How VDT/SimVision works
A r c h it e c t , E l e c t r ic a l ,
H V A C , U t il i t ie s EHS EO RM C l ie n t
P la n n in g s e c u r it y , N e t w o r k s
S R G A r c h it e c t u r a l
F ir m
S ta r t
I d e n t if y p a t h w a y s & o p
w o r k z o n e s fo r
d a t a /t e lc o s y s t e m s
D e f i n e E M I s e p a r a t io n
r e q u ir e m e n t s
Ow ner
I d e n t if y p a t h w a y s & o p C o o r d i n a t e M E P d e s ig n w / d a t a a p pro va l
w o r k z o n e s fo r r e q u ir e m e n t s
H V A C /M E P s y s t e m s
F i n is h
• Discrete event”
“Discrete event simulation: Simulator
1. Start milestone asks first task(s): please start
2. Divide task into (~20) subtasks
3. Task asks responsible actor: please start work
on (next) subtask
1. Actor says OK; tells simulator to wait for predicted
subtask duration
2. When actor “reawakened” later, ask “Am I done?”
– Yes: go to (4)
– No; I failed: initiate rework; return to (3)
– No; I got interrupted: initiate coordination; return to (3)
4. If last subtask competed, ask successor(s) to
start; else return to (3)
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 28
2009
How VDT/SimVision Works D a ta s y s te m
E x e c u t iv e
c o o r d in a t io n
PM
A r c h it e c t , E le c t r i c a l ,
H V A C , U t i li t i e s EHS EO R M C li e n t
P la n n i n g s e c u r it y , N e t w o r k s
S R G A r c h it e c t u r a l
F ir m
S ta r t
I d e n t if y p a t h w a y s & o p
w o r k z o n e s fo r
d a t a /t e l c o s y s t e m s
D e f in e E M I s e p a r a t i o n
r e q u ir e m e n t s
Ow ner
I d e n t if y p a t h w a y s & o p in i
C o o r d i a t e M E P d e s ig n w / d a t a a p p ro va l
w o r k z o n e s fo r r e q u ir e m e n t s
H V A C /M E P s y s t e m s
F i n is h
• Stochastic Entity “Micro” behaviors
skill(high
– Task duration up (down) with actor skill(high, low)
– Task coordination and rework probabilities up
(down) with actor skill (high, low)
– Task coordination and rework probability up
(down) with task complexity (high, low)
–…
• Simulator has precedence to sequence
application of multiple µ-behaviors
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 29
2009
Predicted project Cost Breakdown
Predicted
P di t d
Direct work
Assumed OK
•A d OK….
Hidden work
Rework
• Maybe “light”
Coordination
• May be large
Wait: no value add
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 30
2009
Predicted Schedule Risks
staff
Risks assuming staff,
task definition
interventions
Predicted Schedule
risk = Simulated –
CPM (Optimistic)
( p )
Durations
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 31
2009
Predicted actor backlog
• Backlog = work
left to do at the
end of the day
Risks
– Schedule
– Coordination
– Product, process
quality control
• Principals need to
manage workload
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 32
2009
Predicted position resource utilization
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 33
2009
Tuesday June 23
Plus Delta
• 3 screens • Computer broken
• POP introduction • Use all 6 screens
• Switch screens • Hard to see right
while talking
g screen
• Stories (Swedish) • Hard to hear in back
• Influence – cost
curve
• Plus delta process
p
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 34
Type-of
Big Idea
• Design and analyze organizations as we
design d l
d i and analyze b idbridges
• Organization analysis allows predicting the
volume and distribution of total, direct and
hidden work ⇒ Organization
Genentech PM
– Project and task durations
Ken Mouchka
SRG Management AEI Mana gement
MEP, Teledata room des ign KPFF
Ta sk 28 H Block Cre w SRG Tele Da ta
Task 27 SRG / AEI AEI Core and SRG AEI Core Code Rev Code Rev
SRG Lab Plan SRG La b Task 37 Furniture Task 44 Project Mgt Task4 AEI Core Task 38 Task 41 Task26 H Block Crew Tas k 23 Task22 HDCCO Costing KPFF HDCCO Core Solve nt Tarter & Tech Landscape Design
Te chnical SRG Lab Technical and Tech Consultant
Task 29
Meetings
Weekly
Lab Planning Pr ogram me eting with Bio Genentech 80% Detailed De sign
La b Planning Program Coordination
Organic Revie w 80% Draw ing Revie w
Meetings with Directors Meeting
Fina l Program Review skin changes w/db team Final Program
BMS Controls Meetings
Confirma tion with Officing confirma tion with LAR
(Weekly)
Lab Planning Program Re view 80%
Me etings with Lab planning Progra m Meeting with Prote in Final Progra m Steel Detailing Tele Data Coordination Meetings
documents
Pha rmacology Chemistry Confirmation with Me etings
Pharmacology
Work Process
– Actor backlogs & task risks
*Exte rior
Programming
Accepted by Genentech
*Cal OSHA Recommend
Determination of LFFH
23. *Reprogram 24. *Complete B13,4 H
B#13 and B#15 block occupancy
Exterior Ar chitecture requirements on MEP
systems (6) Coord B13 MEP
floor section
26. *Finalize B#13 and
B#15
Bookend
Exiting/ar chitecural H
Programming
occupancy concept (8) *Revise (1 3,15,16) MEP specs, P&ID's,
Accepted by Genente ch MEP
MEP loads, control sequence s
Equipme nt
41. *Repr ogram
schedules
bookends B#13 and
finalize d
B#1 5 Notice to proceed on
structural change s *Pac kage B str uctural
modifications (CCD3A)
36. *Analyze
structura l impacts 22 . *Complete catwalk drawings
29. *Doc ument
35. *Fina lize lab plan
Protein Chemistry
Progr am 4. complete all Interior Arc hitcture 20. *Deter mine Scope of
18. *Detailed Lab pa ckage D including vivarium
Progr am changes
Documentation
32. *Fina lize
Bio-Orga nic
Chemistry
G accept lab 15. J eff reprogram HMIS
Program 5. *Finalize lab & Equipment
– Coordination, rework wait time that
equipment matrix
47. *Develop lab plans
33. *Fina lize *Lab and
DD plan
LAR Progr am vivarium
Programming *Turnover lab and
Complete vivarium DD plan
to AEI Package D a nd UG
28. *Determine 49. Develop Turnover
34. *Fina lize a ddendum issued:
segregation of lab reflected ceiling reflected
Pharmacology Architect underground utilities,
and te ch space plan ceiling plan to 1 6. *HDCCO Determine
Program program/MEP vivarium ca twalk
AEI Schedule Impact
oncepts
44. *Complete Established
B#14 Offic ing 48. *Develop exiting By Design
Planning pla n Te am *Notice to proceed
*Pa ckage C
*05 -07-01 with detailed design *Acce pt project
skin
39. *Finalize MEP 14. *HDCCO upda te Estimate of cost scope:budget MEP 80% Review (2 1-4) Finalize MEP Deta ils,
modifications (20 ) Incorpora te
distribution and of Program by Genentech comments update spe cs and p&ID's
sec tion 1. *Redesign main MEP 80% MEP review incorporated
distribution systems c omments
2. Initial rede sign MEP branch
lateral distribution Issue 8 0%
27. *Finalize B#13,
25. *Do Central Plant MEP CDs
15 Shaft Size &
MEP Room design changes
17. * Risick
Loca tions reprogra m solvent 13. *Code Consulta nts *City Approval of
21 . *Prepare Plan Views for 10. Dr aft Alterna te means City Approval of
distribution and was te Review Concept for final H Conc ept
Review of Concept w/City Alternate Means
31.* AEI & city Presentation Finish
30. *Approve for Progr am Detailed Design 80 PC
42. *Develop SRG
Change to Complete
Execution Determine
make projects late and participants
De sign
Strategy Design $/Time 8. Review Alternate
Contract *Design Budget & (19) Genentech review
Impact of Means w/impact on LEL 80% drawings
Schedule for Changes and LFFH
Approved 53. Incorporate
comments, c omplete
46. *RA Furnture 52. Finalize landscape Architectur al detail
Concept Complete
3. Complete Tele Data Design *City Accept
43. *Changes in Stee l
Forwarded to Steel e xiting
Detailers
50 . Designate size, loca tion of G acc ept
40. *SRG 13 MEP, te ledata rooms 13/1 4
Reprogram 15/14 Interface
interface, exiting,
stair s
51. Designate size, location
of 14 MEP, teledata r ooms G acc ept
15/1 4
55. KPFF design
Interface
stairs for 15/14
B13 MEP HVAC,
54. KPFF design conduit, piping mains
stairs for 13/14 completed
38. *SRG
Reprogram 13/14
interface, exiting,
stairs
k d d frustrated
overworked and f t t d
37.
37
*Reprogr am
B#15 Shafts
19. *Dete rmine vertical
utilities
12 . *Complete UG
utiliites
45. *Complete all
Basement/LAR Draw ings
(3 ) *AEI design MEP
HVAC, Conduit &
piping mains B13
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 35
Method
g g
• Design the organization
model using the OBS and
g g
Organization segment of the
POP model MEP, Teledata room des ign
SRG Lab Plan
Task 29
Ta sk 28
SRG La b
KPFF
Ken Mouchka
Task 37 Furniture Task 44
Genentech PM
Project Mgt Task4 AEI Core Task 38 Task 41
Task 27
Task26 H Block Crew
SRG Management
Tas k 23
SRG / AEI
Organization
Te chnical
Task22
AEI Mana gement
AEI Core and
SRG Lab
HDCCO Costing
SRG
Technical
AEI Core
and Tech
KPFF HDCCO Core
Code Rev
Consultant
Solve nt Tarter
H Block Cre w
& Tech
SRG
Landscape
Tele Da ta
Design
Code Rev
Meetings
Weekly
Lab Planning Pr ogram me eting with Bio Genentech 80% Detailed De sign
La b Planning Program Coordination
Organic Revie w 80% Draw ing Revie w
Meetings with Directors Meeting
Fina l Program Review skin changes w/db team Final Program
BMS Controls Meetings
Confirma tion with Officing confirma tion with LAR
(Weekly)
Lab Planning Program Re view 80%
Me etings with Lab planning Progra m Meeting with Prote in Final Progra m Steel Detailing Tele Data Coordination Meetings
documents
Pha rmacology Chemistry Confirmation with Me etings
Pharmacology
Work Process
*Exte rior
Programming
Accepted by Genentech
*Cal OSHA Recommend
Determination of LFFH
23. *Reprogram 24. *Complete B13,4 H
B#13 and B#15 block occupancy
Exterior Ar chitecture requirements on MEP
systems (6) Coord B13 MEP
floor section
26. *Finalize B#13 and
B#15
Bookend
Exiting/ar chitecural H
Programming
occupancy concept (8) *Revise (1 3,15,16) MEP specs, P&ID's,
Accepted by Genente ch MEP
MEP loads, control sequence s
Equipme nt
41. *Repr ogram
schedules
bookends B#13 and
finalize d
B#1 5 Notice to proceed on
structural change s *Pac kage B str uctural
modifications (CCD3A)
36. *Analyze
structura l impacts 22 . *Complete catwalk drawings
29. *Doc ument
35. *Fina lize lab plan
Protein Chemistry
Progr am 4. complete all Interior Arc hitcture 20. *Deter mine Scope of
18. *Detailed Lab pa ckage D including vivarium
Progr am changes
Documentation
32. *Fina lize
Bio-Orga nic
Chemistry
G accept lab 15. J eff reprogram HMIS
Program
Type-of
5. *Finalize lab & Equipment equipment matrix
47. *Develop lab plans
33. *Fina lize *Lab and
DD plan
LAR Progr am vivarium
Programming *Turnover lab and
Complete vivarium DD plan
to AEI Package D a nd UG
28. *Determine 49. Develop Turnover
34. *Fina lize a ddendum issued:
segregation of lab reflected ceiling reflected
Pharmacology Architect underground utilities,
and te ch space plan ceiling plan to 1 6. *HDCCO Determine
Program program/MEP vivarium ca twalk
AEI Schedule Impact
oncepts
44. *Complete Established
B#14 Offic ing 48. *Develop exiting By Design
Planning pla n Te am *Notice to proceed
*Pa ckage C
*05 -07-01 with detailed design *Acce pt project
skin
39. *Finalize MEP 14. *HDCCO upda te Estimate of cost scope:budget MEP 80% Review (2 1-4) Finalize MEP Deta ils,
modifications (20 ) Incorpora te
distribution and of Program by Genentech comments update spe cs and p&ID's
sec tion 1. *Redesign main MEP 80% MEP review incorporated
distribution systems c omments
2. Initial rede sign MEP branch
lateral distribution Issue 8 0%
27. *Finalize B#13,
25. *Do Central Plant MEP CDs
15 Shaft Size &
MEP Room design changes
17. * Risick
Loca tions reprogra m solvent 13. *Code Consulta nts *City Approval of
21 . *Prepare Plan Views for 10. Dr aft Alterna te means City Approval of
distribution and was te Review Concept for final H Conc ept
Review of Concept w/City Alternate Means
31.* AEI & city Presentation Finish
30. *Approve for Progr am Detailed Design 80 PC
42. *Develop SRG
Change to Complete
Execution Determine
De sign
Strategy Design $/Time 8. Review Alternate
Contract *Design Budget & (19) Genentech review
Impact of Means w/impact on LEL 80% drawings
Schedule for Changes and LFFH
Approved 53. Incorporate
comments, c omplete
46. *RA Furnture 52. Finalize landscape Architectur al detail
Concept Complete
3. Complete Tele Data Design *City Accept
43. *Changes in Stee l
Forwarded to Steel e xiting
Detailers
50 . Designate size, loca tion of G acc ept
40. *SRG 13 MEP, te ledata rooms 13/1 4
Reprogram 15/14 Interface
interface, exiting,
stair s
51. Designate size, location
of 14 MEP, teledata r ooms G acc ept
15/1 4
55. KPFF design
Interface
stairs for 15/14
B13 MEP HVAC,
54. KPFF design conduit, piping mains
stairs for 13/14 completed
38. *SRG
Reprogram 13/14
interface, exiting,
stairs
37
37.
*Reprogr am
B#15 Shafts
19. *Dete rmine vertical
utilities
12 . *Complete UG
utiliites
45. *Complete all
Basement/LAR Draw ings
(3 ) *AEI design MEP
HVAC, Conduit &
piping mains B13
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009
Breakdown structures in VDC
Product Product Component types
Breakdown Describe
Structure (PBS) Physical elements
Major types of Systems
components S
Spaces
Relate (implicitly) to OBS, WBS
Type-of
Breakdown structures
Hierarchical
Relate to each other
Types, not instances
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 37
Breakdown structures in VDC
Organization Organization component
Breakdown
types
Structure (OBS) Describe Actors
Major types of g
Design
organization Construction
components Other stakeholders
Relate (implicitly) to PBS, WBS
Type-of
Breakdown structures
Hierarchical
Relate to each other
Types, not instances
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 38
Breakdown structures in VDC
Process (Work) Process (Work) component types
Breakdown Describe t k
D ib tasks
Structure (WBS) Design
Major types of Construction
tasks Other
Relate (explicitly) to OBS, WBS
Type-of
Breakdown structures
Hierarchical
Relate to each other
Types, not instances
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 39
Implicit in BSs, POP
• BSs (and hence POP models) do not (but
models do) represent:
– Attributes
• Product: dimensions, cost, materials, …
• Actor: size, experience, skills available, …
• Task: size, complexity, skills needed, …
p g
– Relationships among
• Product elements: supports, enclosed-by, adjacency
• Actors: reports-to, responsibility
• Tasks: precedence, coordination, rework
p , ,
• Product Elements ⇔ Organization actors ⇔ Process tasks
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 40
Implicit in BSs, POP
• BSs (and hence POP models) do not (but
i li d d l do) t
specialized models d ) represent:
– Discipline applications
• Product model
• Organization – Process model
•P l h d l
Process plan or schedule
Type-of
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 41
Big Ideas
• Design the organization model using the
OBS and Organization segment of the
POP model
• Organization analysis allows predicting the
volume and distribution of hidden work: the
coordination and rework that make projects Ken Mouchka
Genentech PM
SRG Management
Organization
AEI Mana gement
late and cause staff frustration and burnout
MEP, Teledata room des ign KPFF
Ta sk 28 H Block Cre w SRG Tele Da ta
Task 27 SRG / AEI AEI Core and SRG AEI Core Code Rev Code Rev
SRG Lab Plan SRG La b Task 37 Furniture Task 44 Project Mgt Task4 AEI Core Task 38 Task 41 Task26 H Block Crew Tas k 23 Task22 HDCCO Costing KPFF HDCCO Core Solve nt Tarter & Tech Landscape Design
Te chnical SRG Lab Technical and Tech Consultant
Task 29
Meetings
Weekly
Lab Planning Pr ogram me eting with Bio Genentech 80% Detailed De sign
La b Planning Program Coordination
Organic Revie w 80% Draw ing Revie w
Meetings with Directors Meeting
Fina l Program Review skin changes w/db team Final Program
BMS Controls Meetings
Confirma tion with Officing confirma tion with LAR
(Weekly)
Lab Planning Program Re view 80%
Me etings with Lab planning Progra m Meeting with Prote in Final Progra m Steel Detailing Tele Data Coordination Meetings
documents
Pha rmacology Chemistry Confirmation with Me etings
Pharmacology
Work Process
• Organization analysis allows predicting the
*Exte rior
Programming
Accepted by Genentech
*Cal OSHA Recommend
Determination of LFFH
23. *Reprogram 24. *Complete B13,4 H
B#13 and B#15 block occupancy
Exterior Ar chitecture requirements on MEP
systems (6) Coord B13 MEP
floor section
26. *Finalize B#13 and
B#15
Bookend
Exiting/ar chitecural H
Programming
occupancy concept (8) *Revise (1 3,15,16) MEP specs, P&ID's,
Accepted by Genente ch MEP
MEP loads, control sequence s
Equipme nt
41. *Repr ogram
schedules
bookends B#13 and
finalize d
B#1 5 Notice to proceed on
structural change s *Pac kage B str uctural
modifications (CCD3A)
36. *Analyze
structura l impacts 22 . *Complete catwalk drawings
29. *Doc ument
volume and distribution of total, direct and
35. *Fina lize lab plan
Protein Chemistry
Progr am 4. complete all Interior Arc hitcture 20. *Deter mine Scope of
18. *Detailed Lab pa ckage D including vivarium
Progr am changes
Documentation
32. *Fina lize
Bio-Orga nic
Chemistry
G accept lab 15. J eff reprogram HMIS
Program 5. *Finalize lab & Equipment equipment matrix
47. *Develop lab plans
33. *Fina lize *Lab and
DD plan
LAR Progr am vivarium
Programming *Turnover lab and
Complete vivarium DD plan
to AEI Package D a nd UG
28. *Determine 49. Develop Turnover
34. *Fina lize a ddendum issued:
segregation of lab reflected ceiling reflected
Pharmacology Architect underground utilities,
and te ch space plan ceiling plan to 1 6. *HDCCO Determine
Program program/MEP vivarium ca twalk
AEI Schedule Impact
oncepts
hidden work ⇒
44. *Complete Established
B#14 Offic ing 48. *Develop exiting By Design
Planning pla n Te am *Notice to proceed
*Pa ckage C
*05 -07-01 with detailed design *Acce pt project
skin
39. *Finalize MEP 14. *HDCCO upda te Estimate of cost scope:budget MEP 80% Review (2 1-4) Finalize MEP Deta ils,
modifications (20 ) Incorpora te
distribution and of Program by Genentech comments update spe cs and p&ID's
sec tion 1. *Redesign main MEP 80% MEP review incorporated
distribution systems c omments
2. Initial rede sign MEP branch
lateral distribution Issue 8 0%
27. *Finalize B#13,
25. *Do Central Plant MEP CDs
15 Shaft Size &
MEP Room design changes
17. * Risick
Loca tions reprogra m solvent 13. *Code Consulta nts *City Approval of
21 . *Prepare Plan Views for 10. Dr aft Alterna te means City Approval of
distribution and was te Review Concept for final H Conc ept
Review of Concept w/City Alternate Means
31.* AEI & city Presentation Finish
30. *Approve for Progr am Detailed Design 80 PC
42. *Develop SRG
Change to Complete
Execution Determine
De sign
Strategy Design $/Time 8. Review Alternate
Contract *Design Budget & (19) Genentech review
Impact of Means w/impact on LEL 80% drawings
Schedule for Changes and LFFH
Approved 53. Incorporate
comments, c omplete
46. *RA Furnture 52. Finalize landscape Architectur al detail
Concept Complete
3. Complete Tele Data Design *City Accept
43. *Changes in Stee l
Forwarded to Steel e xiting
Detailers
50 . Designate size, loca tion of G acc ept
40. *SRG 13 MEP, te ledata rooms 13/1 4
Reprogram 15/14 Interface
interface, exiting,
stair s
51. Designate size, location
of 14 MEP, teledata r ooms G acc ept
– Project and task durations
15/1 4
55. KPFF design
Interface
stairs for 15/14
B13 MEP HVAC,
54. KPFF design conduit, piping mains
stairs for 13/14 completed
38. *SRG
Reprogram 13/14
interface, exiting,
stairs
37.
37
*Reprogr am
B#15 Shafts
19. *Dete rmine vertical
utilities
12 . *Complete UG
utiliites
45. *Complete all
Basement/LAR Draw ings
(3 ) *AEI design MEP
HVAC, Conduit &
piping mains B13
– Actor backlogs & task risks
– Coordination and rework effort that
make projects late and participants
overworked and frustrated
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 42
Organization Models
• Model • How “good” is this
• O
Organization
i ti Organization – Process
design?
• (Design) work process
• Simulation predictions:
– Gantt chart
– Risks, …
Organization
Genentech PM
Ken Mouchka
SRG Management AEI Management
MEP, Teledata room design KPFF
Task 28 H Block Crew SRG Tele Data
Task 27 SRG / AEI AEI Core and SRG AEI Core Code Rev Code Rev
SRG Lab Plan SRG Lab Task 37 Furniture Task 44 Project Mgt Task4 AEI Core Task 38 Task 41 Task26 H Block Crew Task 23 Task22 HDCCO Costing KPFF HDCCO Core Solvent Tarter & Tech Landscape Design
Technical SRG Lab Technical and Tech Consultant
Task 29
Meetings
Weekly
Lab Planning Program meeting with Bio Genentech 80% Detailed Design
Lab Planning Program Coordination
Organic Review 80% Drawing Review
Meetings with Directors Meeting
Final Program Review skin changes w/db team Final Program
BMS Controls Meetings
Confirmation with Officing confirmation with LAR
(Weekly)
Lab Planning Program Review 80%
Meetings with Lab planning Program Meeting with Protein Final Program Steel Detailing Tele Data Coordination Meetings
documents
Pharmacology Chemistry Confirmation with Meetings
Pharmacology
Work Process
*Exterior
Programming
Accepted by Genentech
*Cal OSHA Recommend
Determination of LFFH
23. *Reprogram 24. *Complete B13,4 H
B#13 and B#15 block occupancy
Exterior Architecture requirements on MEP
systems (6) Coord B13 MEP
floor section
26. *Finalize B#13 and
B#15
Bookend
Exiting/architecural H
Programming
occupancy concept (8) *Revise (13,15,16) MEP specs, P&ID's,
Accepted by Genentech MEP
MEP loads, control sequences
Equipment
41. *Reprogram
schedules
bookends B#13 and
finalized
B#15 Notice to proceed on
structural changes *Package B structural
modifications (CCD3A)
36. *Analyze
structural impacts 22. *Complete catwalk drawings
29. *Document
35. *Finalize lab plan
Protein Chemistry
Program 4. complete all Interior Architcture 20. *Determine Scope of
18. *Detailed Lab package D including vivarium
Program changes
Documentation
32. *Finalize
Bio-Organic
Chemistry
G accept lab 15. Jeff reprogram HMIS
Program 5. *Finalize lab & Equipment equipment matrix
47. *Develop lab plans
33. *Finalize *Lab and
DD plan
LAR Program vivarium
Programming *Turnover lab and
Complete vivarium DD plan
to AEI
28. *Determine Package D and UG
34. *Finalize 49. Develop Turnover
segregation of lab addendum issued:
Pharmacology reflected ceiling reflected
and tech space Architect 16. *HDCCO Determine underground utilities,
Program plan ceiling plan to
program/MEP Schedule Impact vivarium catwalk
AEI
oncepts
44. *Complete Established
B#14 Officing 48. *Develop exiting By Design
Planning plan Team *Notice to proceed
*Package C
*05-07-01 with detailed design *Accept project
skin
39. *Finalize MEP 14. *HDCCO update Estimate of cost scope:budget MEP 80% Review (21-4) Finalize MEP Details,
modifications
distribution and by Genentech (20) Incorporate comments update specs and p&ID's
of Program
section 1. *Redesign main MEP 80% MEP review incorporated
distribution systems comments
2. Initial redesign MEP branch
lateral distribution Issue 80%
27. *Finalize B#13,
25. *Do Central Plant MEP CDs
15 Shaft Size &
MEP Room design changes
17. *Risick
Locations reprogram solvent 13. *Code Consultants *City Approval of
21. *Prepare Plan Views for 10. Draft Alternate means City Approval of
distribution and waste Review Concept for final H Concept
Review of Concept w/City Alternate Means
31.* AEI & city Presentation Finish
30. *Approve for Program Detailed Design 80 PC
42. *Develop SRG
Change to Complete
Execution Determine
Design
Strategy Design $/Time 8. Review Alternate (19) Genentech review
Contract *Design Budget &
Impact of Means w/impact on LEL 80% drawings
Schedule for Changes and LFFH
Approved 53. Incorporate
comments, complete
46. *RA Furnture 52. Finalize landscape Architectural detail
Concept Complete
3. Complete Tele Data Design *City Accept
43. *Changes in Steel
Forwarded to Steel exiting
Detailers
50. size,
50 Designate size location of G accept
40. *SRG 13 MEP, teledata rooms 13/14
Reprogram 15/14 Interface
interface, exiting,
stairs
51. Designate size, location
of 14 MEP, teledata rooms G accept
15/14
55. KPFF design
Interface
stairs for 15/14
B13 MEP HVAC,
54. KPFF design conduit, piping mains
stairs for 13/14 completed
38. *SRG
Reprogram 13/14
interface, exiting,
stairs
37.
*Reprogram
B#15 Shafts
19. *Determine vertical
utilities
12. *Complete UG
utiliites
45. *Complete all
Basement/LAR Drawings
(3) *AEI design MEP
Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 43
HVAC, Conduit &
piping mains B13
23 - 24 June
Conceptual framework: Model
Simulator simulates actors doing tasks
Model
Executive
Data system
coordination
Programs PM
Redesign FRC II
for Open labs
Projects Architect, Electrical,
HVAC, Utilities EHS EORM Client
Planning security, Netw orks
Tasks SRG Architectural
Firm
Fi
Position1
Organization Start
Identify pathw ays & op
w ork zones for
data/telco system s
Define EM I separation
requirem ents
Precedence Ow ner
Coordinate MEP design w /data approval
Exception reporting
Identify pathw ays & op
w ork zones for requirem ents
HVAC/MEP system s
Coordination
Finish
Rework
g
Meetings
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009
g p
Organization Options
• Any two goals look attainable
– Duration; Cost (staff); Organization process quality
Legend Meets Goal Almost meets Unmet
goal
g Goal
Case Sim Finish Time Sim Cost (K$) Risk Comment
*Contractor increase staff 3/21/01 244 0.515 Not feasible
All staff FT 4/16/01 252 0.56 Very difficult for other projects
50% Design review/meetings 5/7/01 353 0.48 Force quick owner decisions
Shorten 50% review tasks 5/21/01 384 0.42 Encourage quick owner decisions
John Q. Full Time 6/6/01 311 0.525 John Q. plus Gary FT
John H. Part Time 6/21/01 324 0.545 John H. plus Gary FT
Don S. Full Time 8/5/01 321 0.56 Don S. plus Gary FT
Gary S. Full Time 10/4/01 335 0.485
Split Contractor Tasks 10/19/01 257 0.5 Add contractor resources
Gary, Amy 50%
y, y / /
10/22/01 251 0.395
Baseline 12/11/01 350 0.515
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 45
g
Evaluation of Schedule goal
To achieve feasible schedule
• Most staff available Full time
• Do 50% design review by meetings, vs. tasks
Sim Finish Time
2/13/02
12/25/01
11/5/01
/ /
9/16/01
Finish Date
7/28/01
6/8/01
4/19/01
2/28/01
1/9/01
11/20/00
10/1/00
s
ew s
f
s
. F me
e
. P ime
e
%
/m FT
af
e
sk
g
sk
m
im
in
tin
st
50
ta
i
tra l Ti
el
Ta
lT
ew ff
lT
tT
ee
e
ta
as
y
as
ul
ul
ul
ar
m
or
re ll s
B
.F
.F
A
re
ct
vi
A
re
Q
S
S
nc
y,
H
ar
on
y
vi
hn
%
on
i
hn
ar
or
G
50
D
Jo
C
G
Jo
ct
n
it
tra
ig
n
pl
rte
es
on
S
ho
D
*C
Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009
46
Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 46
S
%
23 - 24 June
50
g goal
Evaluation of Budget g
To achieve feasible budget
Cases with acceptable schedule
P di t d Staff Cost (K$)
Predicted St ff C t
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
f
50 w/m line
T
e
Ba e
gs
Do . Fu ks
e
s
Fu m e
%
Am taf
m
m
fF
sk
m
50
re etin
s
y, e s
Ti
Ti
Ti
i
se
Ta
ta
tT
af
y
ll
ll
st
ll
e
G eas
w
ar Par
hn or
hn Fu
vie
Co All
Jo act
r
S.
S.
nc
Q
H.
te evie
r
ar
nt
i
y
n
%
or
r
Jo
G
ct
Sh ign
ra
l it
n
Sp
s
t
on
De
or
*C
%
50
23 - 24 June 47
Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009
Evaluation of risk goal
To achieve feasible organization process quality
Cases with acceptable
schedule Risk
Cases with acceptable
C ith t bl 0.6
0.5
budget 0.4
0.3
03
0.2
0.1
0
Ba ff
FT
e
e
e
gs
ks
e
e
s
vie 0%
a
l in
m
im
sk
m
m
st
t in
as
Ti
ff
Ti
Ti
5
se
lT
ta
ta
rT
ee
se
y
ll
ll
rt
ul
w
ls
Am
Fu
Fu
Pa
ea
m
to
.F
Al
w/
tra trac
cr
S.
S.
re
Q
H.
y,
vie
in
ar
y
n
hn
%
n
hn
re
or
ar
Do
Co
G
50
Jo
Jo
G
ct
gn
lit
n
si
te
Sp
on
De
or
*C
Sh
%
50
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 48
p g j
Comparing Project Schedule Risks
staff
Risks assuming staff,
task definition
interventions
Predicted Schedule
risk = Simulated –
CPM (Optimistic)
Durations
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 49
Tabular results
• Program Stats
• Project Stats
• Task Stats
• Organization
Stats
• Milestone Stats
• Position Stats
Copy and paste
to Excel
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 50
Executive Dashboard
• Shows evaluation of predicted behavior
(finish date, revenue, cost, quality,
backlog) | Goals
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 51
SimVision
• Describe
F,F d fO i ti d l
– F F and B of Organization and process plus
relationships within and between each
p
• Explain ( y)
(“why”): n/a
• Evaluate: which organization – process
design version(s) satisfies stated
i t (E ti Dashboard);
requirements (Executive D hb d)
• Predict:
Backlogs, dates,
– Actor Backlogs task schedule dates actor and
task effort, actor and task risks (charts)
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 52
Representation of Organization and Process Function
Requirem e
Product Form Behaviors Weight
Qualitative Threshhold values
(sum
nt
Relationshi =
Object Attribute p Requirem ent Choice Predicted Observed Assessed -2 -1 0 1 2 100)
Product
Requireme
nt
Relationsh Functional Product Form (Space,
Product Scope ip Requirement System)
Product Scope . Systems includes Systems Systems ?o ?a ?w
Product Scope . Building Spaces includes Spaces Spaces ?o ?a ?w
Project Goals
Project Goal . Capacity (people) >= - ?p ?o ?a ?a ?a ?a ?a ?a ?w
Project Goal . Evaluated goodness ?o ?a
Organization
Requireme
– Functions:
nt
Relationsh Functional Organization Form
Organization Scope ip Requirement (Actor)
Organization Scope . Actors includes Actors
Organization Goals
Organization Goal . Predicted . Cost (K$) <= ?r ?p ?o ?a ?a ?a ?a ?a ?a ?w
Process
Process Form (Task
Process Scope (Task Action: Object) Responsible Actor Action: Object)
Process Task . Design: Building Actor Actor that designs Task . Design: Building
Task . Predict: Predictable Task . Predict:
Process Behaviors Actor Actor that predicts Predictable Behaviors
• POP SimVision
Task . Assess:
Process Task . Assess: Behaviors Actor Actor that assesses Behaviors
Process Task . Build: Building Actor Actor that builds Task . Build: Building
Process Goals
Process Goal . Peak Quality Risk < ?r ?p ?o ?a ?a ?a ?a ?a ?a ?w
Sum (Assessed goodness): 0 Sum (weights): 0
• Represent threshold values and result of evaluating Hw Spec Available
D ata
A rchitect
S W P roject
Manager
predicted results in MACDADI
Custom er
Inte gration te am
U I-Analysis team representativ e
S W P roject
Manager
D ata
A rchitect
S W D esign coordination
Hw Spec Available S tart1
Custom er
Inte gration te am
U I-Analysis team Dev elop representativ e Info to Hw
specification
– Forms/Scope
Im ple m ent
a nalys is
S W D esign coordination sys te m
Im plem ent UI s tress
S tart1
data m odel te st
Finish
Dev elop Info to Hw
specification Integrate Ready for
sytem s system s test
a nalys is stre ss
Im ple m ent
a nalys is sys te m test
Im plem ent S s tress
UIystem s
Im plem ent U I
data m odel integration test
te st
Finish
• POP SimVision Im plem ent U I
Integrate
sytem s
S ystem s
integration test
Ready for
system s test
Fa il
to Hw
a nalys is stre ss
test
Fa il
– Behaviors
to Hw
SimVision di t i theoretically-founded,
• Si Vi i predicts using th ti ll f d d
model-based methods POP
• Evaluation
– SimVision evaluates design performance | Functional
goals MACDADI
– You can use MACDADI to define a broader goal set
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 53
SimVision methods
• Design options:
– Create new Case for each option
– Suggestion: Make one intervention per case
– Compare case results in Executive Dashboard
and charts of result comparisons
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 54
SimVision methods
• Possible Interventions – Change:
– Task definition
– Task precedence
Task St t t t t l
– T k Start-to-start lag
– Actor size
– Actor – task assignment
– Actor skills
– Goals
Cases
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 55
g
Virtual Design and Construction
p y
• Use of multi-disciplinary • Organization models
performance models of
design–construction in VDC
p j
projects p
– Each discipline has
– Product (building) an organization, work
– Organization process
– Work Process
– All disciplines must
• To coordinate!
– Visualize and describe
project – Assuming: g
– Analyze project – Simulate model:
performance
– Predict effects of choices
– Evaluate choices
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 56
(Multiple) Predictable performance objectives
y
• Safety: 0 lost hours
Schedule, Cost, Scope: 100% client satisfaction l
Directly related
l d
• Sustainability: 10-20% better than previous recent jobs to Organization
Outcomes
Schedule: 95% on-time start, finish of all scheduled activities Model
Cost: f b d t d it ithi f budgeted
• C t >= 95% of budgeted items within 2% of b d t d cost t
Field material delivery: 95% within 24 hours of use
Decision latency (Decision-making promptness): mean working days <= 1;
95% within 2 daysy
Response latency (Decision-making no earlier than necessary): mean
working days <= 1; 95% within 2 days
Field-generated Requests for Information: 0 (for questions related to issues that
could have been identified at the award of the construction contract)
Rework volume: 0 (for field construction work); Goal = 10-20% (virtual work)
Meeting effectiveness: > 90% participation
Meeting efficiency: > 70% prediction, evaluation Drivers – Measurable process
Scope: POP designs; objectives to manage
Modeled and managed Scope: 100% of POP items with > 10 (2)% of time, cost,
effort or energy
Coordination activity: planned, explicit, public, informed > 90%
Prediction basis: > 80% of predictions founded
Design versions: 2 or more >= 80% Controllable
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 57
Type-of
Big Idea
• Design and analyze organizations as we
design d l
d i and analyze b idbridges
• Organization analysis allows predicting the
volume and distribution of total, direct and
hidden work ⇒ Organization
Genentech PM
– Project and task durations
Ken Mouchka
SRG Management AEI Mana gement
MEP, Teledata room des ign KPFF
Ta sk 28 H Block Cre w SRG Tele Da ta
Task 27 SRG / AEI AEI Core and SRG AEI Core Code Rev Code Rev
SRG Lab Plan SRG La b Task 37 Furniture Task 44 Project Mgt Task4 AEI Core Task 38 Task 41 Task26 H Block Crew Tas k 23 Task22 HDCCO Costing KPFF HDCCO Core Solve nt Tarter & Tech Landscape Design
Te chnical SRG Lab Technical and Tech Consultant
Task 29
Meetings
Weekly
Lab Planning Pr ogram me eting with Bio Genentech 80% Detailed De sign
La b Planning Program Coordination
Organic Revie w 80% Draw ing Revie w
Meetings with Directors Meeting
Fina l Program Review skin changes w/db team Final Program
BMS Controls Meetings
Confirma tion with Officing confirma tion with LAR
(Weekly)
Lab Planning Program Re view 80%
Me etings with Lab planning Progra m Meeting with Prote in Final Progra m Steel Detailing Tele Data Coordination Meetings
documents
Pha rmacology Chemistry Confirmation with Me etings
Pharmacology
Work Process
– Actor backlogs & task risks
*Exte rior
Programming
Accepted by Genentech
*Cal OSHA Recommend
Determination of LFFH
23. *Reprogram 24. *Complete B13,4 H
B#13 and B#15 block occupancy
Exterior Ar chitecture requirements on MEP
systems (6) Coord B13 MEP
floor section
26. *Finalize B#13 and
B#15
Bookend
Exiting/ar chitecural H
Programming
occupancy concept (8) *Revise (1 3,15,16) MEP specs, P&ID's,
Accepted by Genente ch MEP
MEP loads, control sequence s
Equipme nt
41. *Repr ogram
schedules
bookends B#13 and
finalize d
B#1 5 Notice to proceed on
structural change s *Pac kage B str uctural
modifications (CCD3A)
36. *Analyze
structura l impacts 22 . *Complete catwalk drawings
29. *Doc ument
35. *Fina lize lab plan
Protein Chemistry
Progr am 4. complete all Interior Arc hitcture 20. *Deter mine Scope of
18. *Detailed Lab pa ckage D including vivarium
Progr am changes
Documentation
32. *Fina lize
Bio-Orga nic
Chemistry
G accept lab 15. J eff reprogram HMIS
Program 5. *Finalize lab & Equipment
– Coordination, rework wait time that
equipment matrix
47. *Develop lab plans
33. *Fina lize *Lab and
DD plan
LAR Progr am vivarium
Programming *Turnover lab and
Complete vivarium DD plan
to AEI Package D a nd UG
28. *Determine 49. Develop Turnover
34. *Fina lize a ddendum issued:
segregation of lab reflected ceiling reflected
Pharmacology Architect underground utilities,
and te ch space plan ceiling plan to 1 6. *HDCCO Determine
Program program/MEP vivarium ca twalk
AEI Schedule Impact
oncepts
44. *Complete Established
B#14 Offic ing 48. *Develop exiting By Design
Planning pla n Te am *Notice to proceed
*Pa ckage C
*05 -07-01 with detailed design *Acce pt project
skin
39. *Finalize MEP 14. *HDCCO upda te Estimate of cost scope:budget MEP 80% Review (2 1-4) Finalize MEP Deta ils,
modifications (20 ) Incorpora te
distribution and of Program by Genentech comments update spe cs and p&ID's
sec tion 1. *Redesign main MEP 80% MEP review incorporated
distribution systems c omments
2. Initial rede sign MEP branch
lateral distribution Issue 8 0%
27. *Finalize B#13,
25. *Do Central Plant MEP CDs
15 Shaft Size &
MEP Room design changes
17. * Risick
Loca tions reprogra m solvent 13. *Code Consulta nts *City Approval of
21 . *Prepare Plan Views for 10. Dr aft Alterna te means City Approval of
distribution and was te Review Concept for final H Conc ept
Review of Concept w/City Alternate Means
31.* AEI & city Presentation Finish
30. *Approve for Progr am Detailed Design 80 PC
42. *Develop SRG
Change to Complete
Execution Determine
make projects late and participants
De sign
Strategy Design $/Time 8. Review Alternate
Contract *Design Budget & (19) Genentech review
Impact of Means w/impact on LEL 80% drawings
Schedule for Changes and LFFH
Approved 53. Incorporate
comments, c omplete
46. *RA Furnture 52. Finalize landscape Architectur al detail
Concept Complete
3. Complete Tele Data Design *City Accept
43. *Changes in Stee l
Forwarded to Steel e xiting
Detailers
50 . Designate size, loca tion of G acc ept
40. *SRG 13 MEP, te ledata rooms 13/1 4
Reprogram 15/14 Interface
interface, exiting,
stair s
51. Designate size, location
of 14 MEP, teledata r ooms G acc ept
15/1 4
55. KPFF design
Interface
stairs for 15/14
B13 MEP HVAC,
54. KPFF design conduit, piping mains
stairs for 13/14 completed
38. *SRG
Reprogram 13/14
interface, exiting,
stairs
k d d frustrated
overworked and f t t d
37.
37
*Reprogr am
B#15 Shafts
19. *Dete rmine vertical
utilities
12 . *Complete UG
utiliites
45. *Complete all
Basement/LAR Draw ings
(3 ) *AEI design MEP
HVAC, Conduit &
piping mains B13
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 58
SimVision mechanics
• Tree view
• Object view
• Project model
• Simulate!
• Control buttons
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 59
SimVision object hierarchy
1.File
1 File
2.Case (version)
3 Program
3.Program
Projects
1.Tasks
2.Positions
2 Positions
3.Meetings
4.Milestones
5.Connections
5 Connections
4.Milestones
g
5.Organizations
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 60
2009
Big idea: “Design organizations”
If we design organizations as we design bridges, we can
predict, hidden work,
predict measure and manage “hidden” work which makes
projects late if not managed well
Product Organization Process
Function Scope (…) Design + Design + Construct
Quality (…)
y( ) Construct Cost
Cost (…) Schedule (…)
Backlog (…) Schedule risk (…)
Form Deliverables Actors Tasks
Behavior Scope Work (direct, Work (direct, hidden) volumes
Quality hidden) volumes Cost
Cost Start, Finish, Duration
Backlog Schedule i k
S h d l risk
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 61
2009
The Big Idea
• Integrated Concurrent Engineering is a
technology-assisted social process that
multi
allows very rapid creation of multi-
disciplinary performance models of
project p oducts, o ga at o s a d
p oject products, organizations and
processes
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 62
2009
Integrated Concurrent Engineering
Background
Given Performance change
• Goal = “extreme collaboration”
(1 week) Latency (secs)
• Excellent POP software 60000
40000
• Collocated team 20000
0 Latency
(secs)
XC
onal
• iRoom
od
traditio
Goo
• Good generic POP model
( ) phase
• SD (DD) p Duration
300
250
200
150
100 Good traditional
50
0 XC
Duration (days)
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 63
The big idea of ICE
• ICE obviously works (e.g., NASA)
• (Tentatively) fi d Controllable factors
(T t ti l ) we find C t ll bl f t
• Excellent modeling and simulation
• Shared project model
• Closed K-net
• …
⇒ Observed process performance:
• Very Short latency (~<= 2 minutes)
⇒ Predicted and observed outcomes:
• by
Coordination among actors (aggregate + b position)
• Rework (aggregate + by position)
• Short schedule
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 64
2009
ICE enabling factors
All required at a high level of performance
• Design staff focus: 100% available
• Modeling & Visualization Tools: Specific & Strategic
• Information Network of designers: Closed
• y
Communication Media Richness and Fidelity: Rich
• Structure Independence: High
• Organizational Hierarchy: Flat
• Goal C High
G l Congruence: Hi h
• Process equivocality: Low
• teg ated Conceptual ode s Se a t ca y c
Integrated Co ceptua Models: Semantically rich
• Social Network Topology: Pooled
• Computer Applications Network Topology: Scaled
• Design subtask duration: Less than 10 minutes
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 65
2009
ICE exercise
• Things to note:
• Discipline specialty: how does it work
for novices?
• POP deliverable: how helpful is it?
?
• Next steps: clear? More or less clear
with same effort and traditional
h d ?
methods?
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 66
2009
The big idea of ICE
The Big Ideas:
• Team-X obviously works (e.g., NASA)
• It works because it achieves exceptionally short
information latency and short task durations,
reliably.
• work.
Multiple factors enable ICE to work
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 67
2009
Integrated Concurrent Engineering at JPL
Photo thanks to JPL
• Integrated Collaborative Engineering (ICE)
– Collocated Organization
– Excellent Technical Infrastructure
– Formal Goal Metrics
– Informal Process and Culture
– Closed Knowledge Network
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 68
Integrated Concurrent Engineering at
Stanford
g g g (ICE)
• Integrated Collaborative Engineering ( )
– Collocated Organization
– Advanced Technical Infrastructure
– Formal Goal Metrics
– Informal Process and Culture
– Cl d Knowledge N t
Closed K l d Network k
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c)
69
2009
Observations
Team-X characteristics
• Organization: Multiple stations (~18)
• Process: careful design
Technology:
• T h l
– Multiple shared display screens
– Shared database (Icemaker)
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 70
Agenda
Fundamental mechanisms
– Short Latency, task durations
– Enabling factors
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 71
Coordination Latency
• Response latency = Time from a designer posing a
question to receipt of a useful answer
• Decision latency = Time from receiving useful
information to making a decision with it
e g ee g practice o both:
• Good engineering p ac ce for bo 2 days
– weeks typical
• Measurable ICE Goal for latency: minutes, reliably
– For and as assessed by all intended stakeholders
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 72
Simple analysis of Latency
Traditional ICE (Team-X)
• Project requires • Project requires
100 “queries” per engineer 100 “queries” per engineer @
Latency = 1 minute
y y (good!)
@ Latency = 2 days (g )
d li l i id b
100 modeling, analysis, sidebar
100 modeling, analysis, “tasks” @ task durations ~8
meeting “tasks” @ task minutes
durations < 2 days
j
Project duration ~ 2 calendar
Project duration ~ 200 days (Team-X)
calendar days (typical) Direct work (modeling +
Latency paces schedule analysis + documentation)
(typical) h d l (Team-X),
paces schedule (T X)
Not direct work Not coordination latency
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 73
ICE requires latency management
• Latency extends schedules
Interdependent tasks have incessant information requests
– I t d d tt k h i ti f ti t
– Requests have response delays (latency)
– Latency adds no value, measures collaborative waste
• Integrated Concurrent Engineering dramatically cuts time and
latency
– Reduces latency from days to minutes
– Direct work tasks must run in minutes
– Enables radically decreased project duration
– Researchers, practitioners report improved cost, quality
– Requires high reliability (> 99%) latency: one major latency source
jeopardizes project success
– New organizational form
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 74
How ICE (Team-X) works
• Manage
– Time to do direct work
• Model, analyze, decide, explain
• Requires highly skilled engineers with excellent tools that
they know well
– Coordination Latency
• Time for a designer to obtain usable information
• Requires many enabling factors
• Measurable objectives for successful ICE:
M bl bj i f f l ICE
1. Time to model, analyze < 10 minutes (> 99% reliability)
2. Latency < = 1 minute (> 99% reliability)
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 75
ICE Enabling Factors
(Committed) (Dynamic) (Visual)
Organization
g Process gy
Technology
Closed knowledge Low process Excellent discipline-
network equivocality Specific Modeling,
Visualization Tools
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
g
High goal congruence
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 76
Organization Enabling factor:
Organization
Closed knowledge
network
Process
Low process
equivocality
Technology
Excellent discipline-
Modeling,
Specific Modeling
Visualization Tools
Closed Knowledge network
g
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Objective: Closed
• Meaning: Requisite knowledge, procedures,
options, and authority are immediately
available in the room (almost always)
• Risk factors: call outs; unanswered callouts
• Team-X Methods:
– Heavy reliance on collaborative design sessions
– Designer collocation d i sessions
D i ll ti during i
– Careful participants selection and training
– Pre plan
Pre-plan to identify needed participants
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 77
Organization Enabling factor:
Organization
Closed knowledge
network
Process
Low process
equivocality
Technology
Excellent discipline-
Modeling,
Specific Modeling
Visualization Tools
Design staff focus
g
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Objective: 100% available during meetings
• Meaning: Design session participants focus
exclusively on project work during design
sessions
• Risk factors: Designers have other
responsibilities during design sessions, so
team waits for expertise
Team-X
• Team X Methods:
– Management support of focus
g
– Short sessions make enable managers to free
valued staff
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 78
Organization Enabling factor:
Organization
Closed knowledge
network
Process
Low process
equivocality
Technology
Excellent discipline-
Modeling,
Specific Modeling
Visualization Tools
Hierarchy structure
y
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
Objective:
• Objecti e Flat
• Meaning: Minimal required decision-making
structure and overhead
• Risk factors: Soliciting management approval
challenges short latency
• Team-X Methods:
– No managers
– Culture of autonomy and respect
– One facilitator
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 79
Organization Enabling factor:
Organization
Closed knowledge
network
Process
Low process
equivocality
Technology
Excellent discipline-
Modeling,
Specific Modeling
Visualization Tools
Egalitarian culture
g
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Objective: Egalitarian
• Meaning: Positions assume empowered
decision making
decision-making and low management
overhead
• Risk factors: Soliciting management approval
challenges short latency
• Team-X Methods:
Culture of autonomy and respect
– C lt f t d t
– Careful recruitment
– Decisions and decision processes highly visible to
all
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 80
Organization Enabling factor:
Organization
Closed knowledge
network
Process
Low process
equivocality
Technology
Excellent discipline-
Modeling,
Specific Modeling
Visualization Tools
Goal Congruence
g
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Objective: Highly congruent
• Meaning: participants know and aspire to
same goals and methods
• Risk factors: positions debate priorities or
methods
• Team-X Methods:
– Discuss goals and methods at session start
– F ilit t attention
Facilitator tt ti
– Culture of congruence
– Analysis and decisions very visible to all
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 81
Process Enabling factor:
Organization
Closed knowledge
network
Process
Low process
equivocality
Technology
Excellent discipline-
Modeling,
Specific Modeling
Visualization Tools
Process equivocality
q y
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Objective: Low
• Meaning: all participants understand and accept procedures and
goals
well understood
– Implies that method applies only to well-understood processes
• Risk factors: positions ask for and wait for facilitator decisions
• Team-X Methods:
• Use only for well-understood processes
– Pre-plan for process clarity
– Culture of autonomy
– Analysis and decisions very visible to all
– Excellent process facilitator
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 82
Process Enabling factor:
Organization
Closed knowledge
network
Process
Low process
equivocality
Technology
Excellent discipline-
Modeling,
Specific Modeling
Visualization Tools
Structure independence
p
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Objective: High
• Meaning: Design tasks are distinct, positions all
understand their responsibilities and can proceed
ith i i l t
with minimal management oversight i ht
• Risk factors: positions solicit or wait for facilitator
decisions
• Team-X Methods:
– Use only for projects that allow independence
– Pre plan
Pre-plan for independence
– Staff selection and training
– Culture of autonomy
– Analysis and decisions very visible to all
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 83
Process Enabling factor:
Organization
Closed knowledge
network
Process
Low process
equivocality
Technology
Excellent discipline-
Modeling,
Specific Modeling
Visualization Tools
Coordination Topology
p gy
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
Objective:
• Objecti e Pooled
• Meaning: Participants resolve problems in
self formed
small self-formed groups
• Risk factors: Formal or inflexible coordination
requirements
• Team-X Methods:
– Collocation
– Shared projection screens
– Sidebar culture
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 84
Technology Enabling factor:
Organization
Closed knowledge
network
Process
Low process
equivocality
Technology
Excellent discipline-
Modeling,
Specific Modeling
Visualization Tools
Modeling, Visualization Tools
g,
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Objective: Excellent
• Meaning: Discipline-specific tools allow all
positions to do direct work very fast
• Risk factors: Manual design activities or poor
tools bottleneck schedule; Other designers
fail to understand a model
• Team-X Methods:
Modeling, visualization, analysis and d i i
– M d li i li ti l i d decision
support tools enable all critical path tasks
– High team experience
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 85
Technology Enabling factor:
Organization
Closed knowledge
network
Process
Low process
equivocality
Technology
Excellent discipline-
Specific Modeling
Modeling,
Visualization Tools
Communications Media
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Objective: Rich
• Meaning: Shared and personal, visual, multi-
p y, g q , g
disciplinary, showing functional requirements, design
choices and predicted behaviors
• Risk factors: Slow process to describe models,
rationale, choices, predictions,
explain rationale evaluate choices make predictions
create alternatives
• Team-X Methods:
– Mature modeling and analysis tools
– Personal workstations
iRoom
– Shared “iRoom” displays
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 86
Technology Enabling factor:
Organization
Closed knowledge
network
Process
Low process
equivocality
Technology
Excellent discipline-
Specific Modeling
Modeling,
Visualization Tools
Database
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Objective: Integrated
• Meaning: Discipline-specific models all access
and store shared data easily
• Risk factors: data reentry, missing shared data
• Team-X Methods:
– Develop good shared generic (POP) model ontology
– Applications have developed uniform semantics for
shared data
– Data visualization in Excel
g
– Designated p y
position assures consistency
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 87
Organization Process Technology
ICE Enabling factors: so what?
Closed k
Cl l d
d knowledge Low process
L E ll t discipline-
Excellent di i li
network equivocality Specific Modeling,
Visualization Tools
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Necessity: excellent ICE performance requires all
factors to work well
• Sufficiency: No one factor suffices
Early id f
• E l evidence (CEE 111/211) of necessity, it
sufficiency of these factors (from observations or
theoretically-founded simulation)
• Process and team experience are crucial, so
understanding factors may help understand how to
g
change Team-X to
– Make specific improvements
– Replicate Team-X (in less than 10 years it to create it)
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 88
Organization Process Technology
Big idea: so what?
Closed k
Cl l d
d knowledge L
Low process E ll t discipline-
Excellent di i li
network equivocality Specific Modeling,
Visualization Tools
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Understanding ICE may help Team-X to
– Make specific improvements
– Replicate Team-X (in less than the 10
y )
years it to create it)
• Understanding ICE may help CEE to
– Implement ICE appropriate
– Replicate Team-X (in less than the 10
years it to create it)
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 89
Organization Process
Why is it hard to determine fundamental enablers of ICE?
Technology
Cl d knowledge
Closed k l d Low process
L Excellent di i li
E ll t discipline-
network equivocality Specific Modeling,
Visualization Tools
Focused design staff High structure Rich communications
independence media
Flat organization Pooled Integrated database
structure communications
Egalitarian culture
High goal
congruence
• Very hard to understand culture from
within
• Many factors appear to characterize
ICE, so no single view or theory applies
Team-X company,
• Team X is like a company not a lab:
– It needs to do work project-by-project
–I i i k f
Instrumenting poses risk to performance
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 90
ICE charrette (class on 23 June)
• Task: Design your project Session Roles
• Deliverables
1. Owner specification: functions
• Owner: Presents
2. Product design 3D sketch(s), project model
PBS + assembly instructions
g
• Product designer +
3 Organization model and org
3.
chart; OBS assembly instructions
4. Process model, WBS, Gantt • Organization &
chart for development
5. POP model and P, O, P detail Process modeler
6. Presentation of your model • POP modeler
• Budget
• Cost estimation
– 90 minutes for ICE charrette
– 30 minutes for presentations • Facilitator
• Groups of ~7
• T to do 2 alternatives
Try d l i
23 - 24 June Chalmers Virtual Design Class (c) 2009 91
