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