Systems Engineering Consultants: Program Empowerment for 21st Century Aerospace Projects

Transcription

1 Systems Engineering Consultants: Program Empowerment for 21st Century Aerospace Projects By Nathan Thomas, Systems Engineer

2 Base2 Solutions is a business technology consulting firm headquartered in Bellevue, Washington. We draw upon our collective intelligence to deliver adaptive, creative, and innovative products to our clients. We attribute our success to our award winning work environment and our use of Systems Engineering in every project for every customer. Start-ups, large-scale corporations, and government customers have all benefited from our flexible yet disciplined approach Base2 Solutions. All rights reserved.

3 Abstract Reports compiled from Government Accountability Office (GAO) investigations show that even with strong managerial support, vast resources, and broad technical and managerial expertise, many of today s aerospace and defense projects fail to meet performance requirements. Further GAO research reveals that project performance is greatly increased when Systems Engineering is employed through the life of the project in both lead and supporting project roles. This paper describes how the incorporation of System Engineering Consultants into company processes and teams helps companies navigate a path to optimal solutions for their technological and program needs. Utilization of SE Consultants throughout the product lifecycle minimizes rework, mistakes, and prevents schedule and cost overruns. The measurable value of Systems Engineering Consultants and their impact on project performance is clear Base2 Solutions. All rights reserved. 3

4 Challenges Facing 21st Century Aerospace Projects The unprecedented technical complexity and integration required in today s aerospace operations is staggering compared to ten years ago. Aerospace systems today are complex systems of systems that require the integration of established, legacy equipment and new and diverse technologies. Integration often results in less system behavior predictability, increasingly complex development, and implementation challenges. Aerospace companies are incorporating advancements in traditional areas like material science, propulsion, aerodynamics, and stability and control. But, they are also bringing technological advancements into previously unrelated areas, like advanced computing for autonomous aircraft flight and obstacle avoidance, data and network security to prevent energy interception and interpretation of proprietary data, and introducing new advancements, like system autonomy, to drastically improve efficiency. The incorporation of modern technology into these previously untouched areas requires expertise in a broad range of engineering disciplines. The tight fiscal environment has produced a heavier reliance on Commercialof-the-Shelf (COTS) products, more modifications to existing designs, and longer system life-cycles. This often means adapting the business to the COTS solution instead of creating a solution that best fits a company s unique business environment, making temporary workarounds the norm, and maintaining equipment and systems well past their peak usefulness. Additionally, a greater emphasis is placed on enhancing performance on existing contracts rather than investing in new or custom development. International collaboration has provided some relief, but it has also has led to challenges in information security, data security, logistics challenges, managing global supply chains, quality control, and the necessity to integrate products that were built all over the world to varying specifications and standards of quality. The emergence of multiple prime/subcontractor teams has forced projects to face wide geographic distributions and the difficult task of integrating many companies and organizations. The aerospace field is increasingly regulated and is witnessing the emergence of strong, international competition. These are just a few of the challenges faced by today s aerospace projects Base2 Solutions. All rights reserved.

5 The Effect of these Challenges on Aerospace In 2008, a GAO assessment of 72 Department of Defense weapons programs found: none of them had proceeded through system development meeting the best practices standards for mature technologies, stable design, or mature production processes by critical junctures of the program, each of which are essential for achieving planned cost, schedule, and performance outcomes. 1 The GAO published similar reports about large National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) projects in their implementation phases. In 2009, 10 out of 13 projects analyzed were found to have experienced significant cost and/or schedule growth. 2 In 2010, 9 of 10 projects analyzed had similar problems, with cost growth ranging from 8 to 68 percent and launch delays ranging from 8 to 33 months. 3 Many of these large aerospace projects were positioned for success. They had strong political and managerial backing. They were executed by established organizations with vast resources and extensive industry and domain expertise. Many incorporated advanced technologies, processes, and tools for managing cost, schedule and risk. They were executed by teams with decades of collective technical and managerial experience. The fact that so many of these projects struggled in spite of these advantages speaks to the challenges of the industry in the 21st century. 1 United States Government Accountability Office, GAO SP Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs. Report to Congressional Committees, March United States Government Accountability Office, GAO SP Assessments of Selected Large-Scale Projects. Report to Congressional Committees, March United States Government Accountability Office, GAO SP Assessments of Selected Large-Scale Projects. Report to Congressional Committees, February Base2 Solutions. All rights reserved. 5

6 The Value of Systems Engineering The United States Army s System Engineering Field Manual (FM ) defines a widely accepted definition of systems engineering: The application of scientific and engineering efforts to (1) transform an operational need into a description of system performance parameters and a system configuration through the use of an iterative process of definition, synthesis, analysis, design, test, and evaluation; (2) integrate related technical parameters and ensure compatibility of all related, functional, and program interfaces in a manner that optimizes the total system definition and design; (3) integrate reliability, maintainability, safety, survivability, human, and other such factors into the total technical engineering effort to meet cost, schedule, and technical performance objectives. 4 The International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) has a more succinct definition: an interdisciplinary approach and means to enable the realization of successful systems. 5 Systems Engineering empowers an organization with understanding about the problem; the ability to find the best solution to that problem; then provides the confidence to build, integrate, test, field, and support that solution knowing the project will be within time and budget constraints. 4 United States Army. FM System Engineering Field Manual. April, International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE). What is Systems Engineering? Base2 Solutions. All rights reserved.

7 Resulting Benefits of Applied Systems Engineering Systems Engineering in the product development cycle is critical for maintaining big-picture awareness during schedule-intense project development. Research shows that implementing Systems Engineering practices throughout the project lifecycle produces measurable benefits. NASA reviewed several of its programs that applied systems engineering. They found that that investing 10-15% of estimated program cost in early development activities (including Systems Engineering efforts) resulted in on-budget performance or only negligible cost overruns. In contrast, NASA s study found that investing less than 10% of estimated program cost in early development resulted in overruns ranging from 30% to greater than 100%. 6 An empirical report by W. Forrest Frantz, Technical Fellow at Boeing, included a review of three projects similar in scope and budget to the aforementioned projects analyzed by NASA. The goal of each project was to build robotic Universal Holding Fixtures (UHF). Each project employed a different level of Systems Engineering. The results showed that projects employing the greatest amount of SE saw the greatest reduction in overall cycle time, whereas projects employing the least amount of SE showed only some overall cycle time improvement. Interestingly, the team charged with building the most complex UHFs used the greatest amount of SE, and therefore saw the greatest reduction in their overall cycle time. Frantz found that even in the face of greater complexity, Systems Engineering applied throughout the project lifecycle reduced the time required to develop requirements, design and produce the system, and perform system testing, thereby reducing the overall cycle time. 7 Systems Engineering application is not only beneficial in product development but also in integration and testing. A 2002 study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) compared the cost of fixing problems found in later development stages to the cost of fixing issues found early, during the requirements and architecture development phase. Problems found during coding and unit test increased cost by a factor of five. Problems found during system integration increased cost by a factor of ten. Problems found during beta test increased cost by a factor of 15. The most severe impact to cost comes from fixing problems during operation. 6 Gruhl, W. Lessons Learned, Cost/Schedule Assessment Guide, Internal presentation, NASA Comptroller s Office, Frantz, W. Forrest Impact of Systems Engineering on Quality and Schedule Empirical Evidence. Boeing, INCOSE Base2 Solutions. All rights reserved. 7

8 Fixes during operation increased cost by a factor of By facilitating early problem identification and resolution, Systems Engineering allows aerospace projects to mitigate the cost of rework and improve development efficiency. Systems Engineering is an important factor in technology market discovery. Robert Cooper describes the value of Systems Engineering in his study: Winning at New Products. Cooper found that projects that did not understand their market had a 26% project success rate, whereas projects that achieved a moderate understanding of the market had a success rate of 64%. The success rate increased to 85% for projects with strong definition of market need. Cooper also found that projects with poor pre-development Systems Engineering were successful only 31% of the time. Success increased to 68% when projects employed moderate pre-development Systems Engineering, and projects that employed high quality Systems Engineering were successful 75% of the time. Cooper concluded that the impact of accurately defining the market need and performing quality Systems Engineering prior to the development phase greatly increased project success. 9 In light of the challenges facing aerospace projects today and in the future, the value of Systems Engineering cannot be underestimated. The Predicament in Finding the Best Systems Engineers For an aerospace project to realize the benefits of Systems Engineering, it must place qualified Systems Engineers in both lead and supporting project roles. Lead roles include decision makers: technical project managers, lead engineers, system architects, integration and verification leads, quality engineers, safety engineers, and functional leadership positions. Supporting roles include IPT team members: specification owners, test engineers, design engineers, and experts from other engineering disciplines. 8 The Economic Impacts of Inadequate Infrastructure for Software Testing, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Planning Report 02-3, May Cooper, Robert G. Winning at New Products, 3rd Edition, Perseus Publishing Base2 Solutions. All rights reserved.

9 Finding such talent is becoming more difficult, and there are three major reasons why excellent Systems Engineers are hard to find. First, nobody graduates from college as a Systems Engineer. Most organizations hire graduates of traditional engineering disciplines to fit a need and then mold them into Systems Engineers through on the job training. The learning curve is steep. Time and strong mentorship is required to mold single-discipline engineers into effective Systems Engineers. Current graduate programs in Systems Engineering provide an important educational foundation for Systems Engineers of all levels and serve as a beneficial supplement to work experience. However, there is no substitute for hands-on experience in the full lifecycle development of complex aerospace systems. Even the most talented engineers require experience to acquire proficiency as Systems Engineers. Today s aerospace companies rarely have the luxury of time and budget to fully develop inexperienced engineers to suit today s complex technological projects, and the experts are needed now. The second challenge is talent redistribution. Great Systems Engineers are in high demand. If your company has good ones, they are likely being courted by other companies. The internal company demand for these individuals may be even greater than the external. This demand often spreads these individuals thin, preventing them from supporting every project that needs them. Even if a project is initially successful by bringing on a seasoned Systems Engineer, history shows that there is a high likelihood that such talent will be pulled without warning to fight fires on another, high-priority project. The third challenge is that the Systems Engineering means different things to different people. Similar job titles in the manufacturing and Information Technology (IT) fields have led to a workforce saturated by people with Systems Engineer titles. While many of these people work with systems, they do not practice Systems Engineering; they have not been trained in nor have they had any experiences with its core concepts, methodologies, and tools. Even within industries and organizations where Systems Engineers practice true Systems Engineering, the tasks performed by those engineers varies dramatically. For example, some Systems Engineers may have expertise in only one area, such as requirements management or independent verification and validation. This makes finding qualified engineers with a demonstrated proficiency in fulllife cycle Systems Engineering very difficult. This is where Systems Engineering Consultants come in Base2 Solutions. All rights reserved. 9

10 Systems Engineering Consultants: Program Empowerment There is no longer a need for your aerospace company to struggle to find or develop Systems Engineering talent; Systems Engineering consultants can solve this issue for you. SE Consultants are top industry talent, have a strong educational background, and demonstrate the ability to lead, communicate, and bring people together. They build quality into their processes so that it is present throughout the project lifecycle Base2 Solutions. All rights reserved.

11 Consultants are very different than contract labor. Contract labor is hired to perform discrete tasks that require expertise for only those specific tasks. This very important role is different than the role played by Consultants. SE Consultants are hired to be facilitators and leaders that empower organizations to solve their problems, improve their processes, and achieve broad goals. Also, SE Consultants are not hired to simply fill vacant seats. They are hired to take shared responsibility and ownership of their clients problems and to drive those problems to resolution. The SE Consultant s role is to be a high-performing, dedicated, embedded team member, not just an advisor. SE Consultants have broad experience with the full system development lifecycle. They bring strong technical domain knowledge that crosses multiple industries. SE Consultants hold expertise in managing complex aerospace system developments. They are familiar with the aerospace industry and its challenges, regulations, customers, and dynamics. SE Consultants bring different experiences and those unique, outside perspectives that are so critical for innovation and problem solving. These traits allow SE Consultants to complement an existing organization in a variety of ways. SE Consultants can execute complex project assignments independently or as part of a project team. They can survey the technical and organizational environment, identify critical issues and collaboratively drive those issues to closure. SE Consultants can provide expertise that may be missing or support the experts that are present. SE Consultants can reach across organizational boundaries in ways that can be difficult for internal employees due to organization structures, communication lines, and company culture. They can also augment an organization by filling gaps that may be present. For example, organizational silos may produce someone who is a very strong designer yet does not understand how to drive an idea through the broader organization. SE consultants can leverage their skills to help this idea reach its full potential. Finally, because SE Consultants have access to the ideas, experiences, and expertise of every Consultant in their firm, the value they provide to an organization can be increased exponentially Base2 Solutions. All rights reserved. 11

12 Summary The inclusion of talented Systems Engineers in all stages of a project s lifecycle can turn challenges into successes by applying a whole-system view to the solution. The application of Systems Engineering early on is a proven way to reduce overall project cost and completion time. To take advantage of all of Systems Engineering s benefits, qualified Systems Engineers must be placed in both lead and supporting project roles. Because of their value, Systems Engineers can be difficult to retain for the entire project lifecycle and in your company, due to the high demand for this talent. The utilization of Systems Engineering Consultants can mitigate the talent migration and enhance overall team effectiveness and project success. SE Consultants provide organizations with the right skills when and where they are needed most and their value is multiplied through their access to the full resources of their firms. SE Consultants are the most valuable resource for today s aerospace projects and will continue to be essential in the exciting technological future ahead of us.

13 About the Author: Nathan Thomas is a young, spirited engineer whose knowledge and skills rival those of his more seasoned colleagues. As a Senior Systems Engineer at Rockwell Collins, Nathan held a variety of roles including Lead Systems Engineer, Integration and Test Lead, and Technical Project Manager as part of a platform-level systems engineering team. Because of his technical and leadership skills, Rockwell Collins Program Management brought Nathan on as a Technical Project Manager for the division s first FAA certification program. Nathan quickly identified opportunities to increase efficiency in systems engineering and project management, implemented recovery plans to address the root causes of inefficiencies, defined detailed entry/exit criteria for each phase of the test program, and supported certification efforts. His leadership and management skills brought the test program to Formal Qualification Testing on time and at a maturity level higher than historical norms. Though his specialties are integration, verification, validation, Nathan has gained significant experience in the full systems development lifecycle and demonstrates a strong ability to lead, motivate, and bring people together to achieve success. Nathan reached across several technical and non-technical organizations of Rockwell Collins as Integration & Verification Lead to effectively manage staffing, resource, and technical issues for four simultaneous test programs. Not only did he meet all schedule and budgetary requirements for all four projects, Nathan s leadership and inclusive work style enabled the team to build and deliver a second System Integration Lab (SIL) in half the estimated time. Nathan knew that the additional SIL was the key to the success of the test programs under his charge. Nathan joined the Base2 team in 2013 and works from the headquarter office in Bellevue, Washington. He has continued to excel in systems engineering roles while adding new skills including quality assurance with ISO 9001 standards as well as becoming an AS9100 internal auditor. Nathan holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Aerospace Engineering from Iowa State University as well as a Graduate Certificate in Systems Engineering and Architecting from the Stevens Institute of Technology. Nathan is available for local speaking engagements Base2 Solutions. All rights reserved. 13

14 Northwest Office (HQ) th Ave NE, Suite 300 Bellevue, Washington Southwest Office 2929 East Imperial Highway Brea, California Tel: