Paralysis by Analysis in Concurrent and Lean Execution

An important alert in the execution of concurrent and lean engineering is to avoid Paralysis by Analysis, since in case of appearing in the key programming activities, adversely affects the project schedule and produces a serious waste of engineering. As an example of this is the damage that Paralysis by Analysis causes in a key activity that must be of high evolution and therefore it does not adequately inform initiated activities of high sensitivity downstream.

Paralysis by Analysis: Failed progress in an activity due to the continuous refining of its results or due to the iterative analysis of each of the details of a developing problem.

“It is better to be roughly right than precisely wrong.” ― John Maynard Keynes

See:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffboss/2015/03/20/how-to-overcome-the-analysis-paralysis-of-decision-making/#7ced720c7cc4

http://www.bsci21.org/9-tips-to-avoid-paralysis-by-analysis/

Integrating Concurrent Engineering & Lean Engineering (CE+LE)

Concurrent Engineering approach aims to prevent potential problems by promoting the incorporation of downstream concerns into the upstream phases of an ongoing process. Lean Engineering approach means eliminating the waste of time and resources caused by the unnecessary generation of knowledge and complex designs not required and also eliminating time spent on non-value-added activities. Mixing both approaches will yield significant improvements in project performance.

Typical issues that produce waste of engineering:

1. Over-production: Implementing analysis, reports and tests not needed.
2. On Hold: Waiting for decisions or waiting for input.
3. Defective Outputs: Rework due to wrong requirements or input. Errors causing the effort to be redone to correct a problem.
4. Unused employee creativity: Not engaging engineers in process improvements for engineering.

Clues to applying Lean Engineering (LE) + Concurrent Engineering (CE):

1. Focusing on Customer needs (LE).
2. Simplicity in design (LE).
3. Design Reuse & Share of features or attributes (LE).
4. Variability Reduction (LE).
5. Deletion of nonvalue-added activities (LE) : 40%-60% of the typical engineer’s or designer’s time is spent on nonvalue-added activities.
6. Focusing on Value activities (LE), which means apply control on:
 • Features and attributes: Satisfy customer needs only.
 • Quality: Lack of defects.
 • Availability on time: Available when it is needed.
 • Cost according to the budget.
7. Enhanced overlapping strategy (CE).
8. Downstream concerns are considered upstream (CE).
9. Implementing Multidisciplinary Concurrent Team (e.g., virtual team) (CE).
10. Implementing early contact with downstream specialists, suppliers and subcontractors (CE).

Overcoming your Own Biases or How to Break Down your Functional Fixedness.

Try out these five steps:
1. Recognize the possibility that Functional Fixedness exists and that you may have some biases on an approach.
2. Check and evaluate each bias.
4. Look for the cause of bias to understand its source and impact on you.
3. Identify a goal, then identify which biases help with this purpose and which biases do not.
5. Monitor your progress and reevaluate your behavior.

Functional Fixedness on Concurrent Management

If we plan the project activities or any other key management issue, being aware of our own internal or inculcated biases (e.g., applying "logical sequences" or saying "we have always done it that way", or assuming: "logical overlaps" and "typical assumptions", among others) and verifying whether they are valid or not, and also verifying if it is valid to apply another approach to these key issues, then we could arrive at surprising conclusions in the planning and management that benefit the project as a whole.
Consequently, it is interesting to reconsider the concept of functional fixation and adjust it to our current situation. Please check out at:
https://hbr.org/2012/05/overcoming-functional-fixednes

Recommended reading from ENTREPRENEUR magazine: 10 WAYS TO SUCCESSFULLY MANAGE VIRTUAL TEAMS

Virtual team management is a key issue for successful concurrent management

URL:

https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/244197?utm_source=Social&utm_medium=Sharebar&utm_campaign=Sumome_share

Recommended article from “Harvard Business Review”: WHY THE PROBLEM WITH LEARNING IS UNLEARNING

Excellent reading for strategies that aim to discover and exploit new business models based on experimentation and learning such as “Discovery Driven Approach”. 

This model may offer another source of competitive differentiation, as some firms develop superior capabilities at experimentation and consequently can build better models more quickly than their slower counterparts. 

URL:

https://hbr.org/2016/11/why-the-problem-with-learning-is-unlearning

MANAGING ASSUMPTIONS DURING PROJECT EXECUTION AND PLANNING.

Adequate project assumptions management is a key issue for the successful implementation of the Concurrent Engineering. Some useful methods for managing assumptions are listed below:

1. Assumption-Based Planning:
   Assumption-Based Planning (ABP) is a tool designed for improving the robustness and adaptability of plan for reducing the number of avoidable surprises in any plan or planning. It is primarily a post planning tool that concentrates on the assumptions in an already-developed plan that are most important to plan´s success and that are most uncertain. ABP decrease the risk that assumptions represent.
2. Critical Assumption Planning:
   Major uncertainties in the business proposition are isolated as critical planning assumptions. Critical assumptions in the plan are then tested. The test sequence is determined by the potential reduction of uncertainty per dollar of test cost. Assessment of the assumption test results marks a milestone. At each milestone the business plan is revised to reflect what has been learned, and the venture is redirected or terminated. This process avoids the wasted effort and expense of pursuing the original plan until commercial failure becomes obvious.
   Keys for Planning:
   Differentiation between primary and derivative assumptions with focus on extracting and understanding the primary assumptions.
   Early construction of a model of the business plan that allows calculation of the impact of primary assumptions such as price or sales productivity factors on derivative assumptions such as revenues and income.
   Assignment of uncertainty ranges to the primary assumption values, not just the most likely values.
   Identification of the critical planning assumptions by determining the impact of their uncertainty ranges on venture net present value.
   Selection of the next venture milestone based on the test program that results in maximum reduction of uncertainty at least cost in least time for the most critical assumption(s).
3. Platform-based planning:
   Future results can be extrapolated from a well-understood and predictable platform of past experience. Predictions could be accurate because they are based on solid knowledge rather than on assumptions
4. Discovery-Driven Planning:
   Discovery-driven planning offers a systematic way to uncover the dangerous implicit assumptions that would otherwise slip unnoticed and thus unchallenged into the plan
   It is based on the implementation of:
   Reverse income statement:
   Modeling the basic economics of the business
   Pro forma operations specs:
   Laying out the operations needed to run the business.
   Key assumptions checklist:
   Ensuring that assumptions are checked
   Milestone planning chart:
   Specifying the assumptions to be tested at each project milestone.

References: 

Towards a Proposed Process to Manage Assumptions during the In-Service Phase of the Product Lifecycle, John Iley and Cees Bil, Transdisciplinary Lifecycle Analysis of Systems R. Curran et al. (Eds.), 2015 The authors and IOS Press.

Critical assumption planning: a practical tool for managing business development risk, Hollister B. Sykes & David Dunham, Journal of Business Venturing Vol 10.

Assumption-Based Planning: A tool for Reducing Avidalbe Surprises, James A. Dewar, Cambridge University Press, RAND 2002.

Discovery Driven Planning,   Rita Mc Grath & Ian MacMillan, Harvard Business Review July-August 1995 Issue

Discovery Driven Growth: A Breakthrough Process to Reduce Risk and Seize Opportunity, Rita Mc Grath & Ian MacMillan, Harvard Business Publishing.

Practical Project Risk Management: The ATOM Methodology, David Hillson & Peter Simon, Management Concepts Inc., Aug 1, 2012