Business Communication Engineering & Communigram...• SAP (cProjects, cFolders, PS,..) This ... is a tool that translates these concepts … and keeping it simple! BCE and CGR integrate

Communigram

Business Communication Engineering

& Communigram

http://www.erdfdistribution.fr/FRONT/ERD/img/logo_ERDF_site.jpg


OUTLINE

1. Communigram and Business Communication Engineering – introduction -

2. The planning concepts used in Communigram

3. Example of the possible use of Communigram for COSY and Palier S2 Syclade program

3.1 A first planning test

3.2 The resources

3.3 The projects

3.4 The « Communigram » COSY versus Pallier

4. In conclusion, the issues to be addressed to effectively implement and use Communigram

© Communigram SA 2012, all rights reserved



Joint project, in the 80's between Renault,

PSA, D-Benz, VW, Fiat and their suppliers of

production systems to reduce time to market

Fact: the parallelisation between

manufacturers and suppliers ("Concurrent

Engineering") involves the control of the

communication links between the different

actors - a non-trivial challenge

Existing tools such as Gantt, PERT, flow

charts, etc. do not allow to organize

exchanges between people and services:

They manage the links between "what to do",

not the communication

Communication must be constantly redefined

because of the vagaries of the project.

A first vehicle developed in 25 months

(Lancia Y) : the development time divided by

two (!)

SICPARI : the foundations of a new logic to control projects

Manufacturer Actors Supplier Actors

Ste

ps

of

the

veh

icle

dev

elop

men

t

Sta

ges

of

pro

du

ctio

n d

evel

op

men

t sy

stem

Required exchange

to work in a simultaneous way




The BCE method, and the Communigram tool have been developed to focus

on several findings, confirmed over the projects: The projects are successful,

.... but certainly are too long

The projects are too long, ..... and end too late

Planning is done poorly, too long to implement, too cumbersome. When considered as correct, it is

already obsolete, it is often the excuse needed to launch the project.

The definition of “what to produce” with “whom” and for “whom” is not enough and leads to many

iterations since the results are not what it was promised.

Management is too often done in a reactive mode rather than anticipated and induces further delays?

The information on the encountered difficulties in upstream are too late. It is the same for the

provision of information needed to start achieving the deliverables.

The communication between project stakeholders is insufficient and often "drowned" in the mass of

general email messages.

The planning tools are too soft and not really user-friendly and then not so helpful.




The BCE method and the Communigram tool have been developed to fulfil

several observations, confirmed over projects: The projects are successful,

certainly .... but too expensive

The projects are too expensive, and mostly more expensive than the initial budgets, .... The main reasons

are the following:

Delays? Waste of time? Time lost due to unnecessary delays and in particular due to delay in upstream

Resources often under experienced on or under inducing unnecessary burdens and costs

Too much downtime? Too many "re-work”?

Shortfall on men and on projects?

And in-fine, the objectives are not met, the requirements are not met, the quality is truncated

Lack of time or budget ?

Lack of precision regarding what is expected at each stage

But also ... The expected targets are they really defined?




OUTLINE





3.2 The resources

3.3 The projects






Background

RACI

• Responsible: Those who do the actual work.

• Accountable: Those who are ultimately accountable for the completion of the work. (Hint: There must be only

one “A” specified for each row in a RACI diagram.)

• Consulted: Those who provide input and/or output as needed. (Consider this as two-way communication.)

• Informed: Those who want to be kept up to date on progress of the particular phase. (Consider this as one-way

communication.)

WBS (Work break Down Structure)

CBS (Cost Break Down Structure

OBS (Organizational Break Down Structure)

DBS (Deliverables Break Down Structure)




The BCE and Communigram are based on eight key project controls

1. Planning building on the basis of project objectives and according to the needs to be produced,

Planning initially the objectives, requirements and deliverables rather than planning how to produce

2. Mastering the « correct » completeness of deliverables

all and only those that are necessary and whose origins and uses are validated by the "DBS”

3. Strengthen the operational responsibilities

Building a participatory planning with the managers in Customer-Supplier mode,

Integrating and managing RACI and deliverables

Decentralizing the planning,

Report Progress reporting through the G-Y-R lights to trigger early warning and responsible

4. Reducing unproductive and waiting time between activities within and between projects

Linking temporal dimension and dynamic workflow,

Planning and facilitating communication and the information exchange and documents between actors and

projects

and consequently, only the operations,




The BCE and Communigram are based on eight key project controls

Increase the planning flexibility

• Building an initial, decentralized and focused planning on what is actually schedulable, as known

Then leading planning updates because the tools promote the evolution,

Control the risk consequences

• Triggering focused early alerts

• Consider the criticality (Need + Priority + Risk) to manage a curve of weighted progress that reflects the contributory value

of what was produced, and not just the costs

Capitalize on the experience,

• Developing "templates" of projects, documents, methods,

Integrating the overall concepts :

• Management based on deliverable

• The RACI,

• The lights,

• Collaborative documentation,

• Decentralized participatory, progressive and truly multi-project planning

• and capitalization




CBS


WBS

Project

Sub-Project

Tasks

DBS

Goals &

Deliverables

Sous-

Livrables

Dynamic

workflow

Links between

deliverables

RACI

Skill structure

Resources

Structure of

the Enterprise

Responsables

Actors

BCE and Communigram, promote a set of concepts, and mainly….

Informé

EPS

1 – as the basis for planning (DBS),

2 – Integrated with : • WBS – CBS – OBS

• the RACI

• the documentation

• Dedicated messaging

2 – Communigram for building, planning and

initializing dynamic Workflow 3 – MyCommunigram to track and report (lights,

making available the deliverables, ...) communicate, be

informed and animate the dynamic Workflow



Task, time and cost Planning

Product

Data

Management

Collaborative tools

Portals

Time and cost

Control

Document

management

(DMS)

Workflow A new type of planning tool

Which can complete and integrated

with the standard:

• Primavera

• Microsoft Project Server

• SAP (cProjects, cFolders, PS,..)

This ... is a tool that translates these concepts … and keeping it simple!


BCE and CGR integrate and contribute to most areas of classical methods of

PMO (ref PMI)

Integration

Scope

Time Resources

Quality

Costs Steering

Risks

Purchase

How the project

management tool can

impact the dimensions of

the PMO?

What are the processes

to be implemented?

The 9 Dimensions of the PMI PMBOK © Communigram SA 2012, all rights reserved



BCE and CGR are part of the P.D.C.A. logic to continuously improve the

quality of oversight the three phases PCA

Plan

«Initial

Planning »

DO

« Project

Delivery»

Check

« measures

& control »

Act

« Real-time

Planning»

Measure / Analyse/

Propose



The scope of BCE and CGR use are part of the 3 PCA phases

Initial Planning

Decomposing the objectives of the

project deliverables

Affecting the requirements for

deliverables

Identify the information needs to achieve the

deliverables

Linking skills to deliverables (RACI)

Identifying and allocating resources to

deliverables

Evaluate the costs and delays per delivrable

Scheduling deliverables (initial

schedule)

Negotiate the time and the costs

Select the baselines

Control

Check the green lights: feasibility of the remaining

to be done

Check the orange lights: Feasibility of the action plan and Measuring the

impact on the requirements, deadlines,

resources and budget

Control the red lights: trigger a request for action

plan and measure the impact on requirements,

deadlines, resources, budget

Check the blue lights: requirement compliance

Progress measurement and evaluating the impact

of identified deviations

Reporting development and dissemination

Real-time Acting

Handling the yellow and red lights by action plans

Updating baselines (costs, deadlines, resources, scope) if necessary





1 –Structuring:

• from the project objectives

• then hierarchy of deliverables,

• involving the description and location of

templates and methodological materials

to be used and to produce documents

3 – …. Then with the RACI

2 - Linking deliverables and skills ...

5 – Finally, create dependencies

between deliverables

4 – Charges evaluation

and adjustment

Using BCE and CGR for initial planning to build a ...



BCE and CGR ease the manage of the scope and needs: decompose the

project deliverables and drive deliverables

decompose the

project into

sub projects

and

deliverables

build the RACI by assigning

responsibility and

accountability on

deliverables

Formalize the

information flow

needed to

produce each

deliverable

Formalize the production

process of the project by

creating delivery flow

between customers and

suppliers.

risks mapping




BCE and CGR ease the management of the project scope and needs:

organize information and track requirements

Remember to

meet the

requirements for

each deliverable

Communicate the

template to

produce the

document

The customer of the

deliverable complete

specific untreated or

partially treated

requirements

monitor the deliverable

in its versions and

intermediate or final

version




BCE and CGR contribute to the time management: negotiating and and

scheduling deliverables

The PMO asks for date confirmation

to the deliverable manager

The PMO is developing the initial

schedule by scheduling the

deliverable in Gantt




BCE and CGR contribute to time management: negotiate

Those managers of deliverables receive requests for

confirmation of date in their project space (my

Communigram)

The manager of deliverables accept or reject the

proposed date justifying their response




BCE and CGR contribute to resource management: involve all

stakeholders

List of deliverables in which the

person participate

Internal message management List of deliverables to be started




BCE and CGR contribute to resource management: control the level of

charges

Evaluate the workload

on each deliverable and

provide ad-hoc

adjustments (e.g.

experience if necessary)




The Quality Management: Defining specific deliverables or milestones to

achieve periodic reviews

identifying the

requested review of

quality and making

them appear available

with a specific manager

Planning specification

reviews prior to the

launch of deliverable

writing




BCE and CGR contribute to cost management: understanding the

contributory value of deliverables

understanding the contributory value

of each deliverable by controlling the

associated requirements

In some cases, we propose the deletion

of deliverables

Visualization of

periodic focus on high

priority deliverables

because they impact the

project's progress

(progress curve)





1 – Report progressing and alerts

managing alerts through lights:

2 – Providing completed deliverables

to customers ......

Using BCE and CGR to assess

3 - Sending completed deliverables

to customers......

4 – Communicating……



BCE and CGR help to manage deadlines: trigger

I have difficulties to finalize the drafting of the

specification, I didn’t receive the part of key

users about reasons for lock-outs…..

The manager of each deliverable declares its progress

by placing different colored lights on each of its

deliverables

In case of difficulties (orange) or blocking (red), the

manager of the deliverable explains the encountered

difficulties




BCE and CGR contribute to the time and quality management: Manage the

document assets and notify customers




BCE and CGR contribute to time and quality management: deliverables

Approval /Deny = to make project progress




BCE and CGR contribute to quality management: control and acknowledge

upstream deliverables to make the project progressing

Upstream deliverable

with problem

A The

downstream deliverable

is potentially at risk

a

Upstream deliverable is blocked A

Downstream deliverable

is also blocked

a

Upstream deliverable is validated A

the downstream deliverable

can progress normally

a

All deliverable editors

agree on the project

quality by validating in

advanced upstream

deliverables needed for

their own deliverables




BCE and CGR contribute to quality management: Charting the requirements

for each acknowledgement

Suplier myCommunigram

Customer myCommunigram

The deliverable-related supplier should control the

fulfilment of the requirements before communicating it

to his client

The deliverable-related customer should control the

compliance with the requirements for the validation of

deliverables from its suppliers. In case of compliance

problem, the deliverables are refused.




BCE and CGR contribute to risk management: continuous monitoring of

priority deliverables

Continuous monitoring (daily) of priority deliverables. In case of an alert, going over problems in project

management, mobilizing and organizing key actors in the immediate action plan





1 – Analysing the behaviour of the project

through the development of alarms

3 – …. Managing Risks

2 – Tracking the most critical

deliverables ......

4 – Assessing the drift impact

Using BCE and CGR to control, monitor and manage…

Chantier Conduite du …Chantier Données

Chantier InterfacesChantier MOAT

Chantier Recetteschantier Transition

Chantier UrbanismeCOSY

Equipe FluxGEC

Intégration & QualificationOpérations Intégration

PMO pallierS2PRM

S2 SAR

SGESI_Coordonnés

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Chantier Conduite du Changement

Chantier Données

Chantier Interfaces

Chantier MOAT

Chantier Recettes

chantier Transition

Chantier Urbanisme

COSY

Equipe Flux

GEC

Intégration & Qualification

Opérations Intégration

PMO pallierS2

PRM

S2

SAR

SGE

SI_Coordonnés



BCE and CGR contribute to risk management: measuring evolution and

anticipating based on light alarms.

Blue Light

• Do Requirements having been controlled and fulfilled ?

• What is the deliverable cost statement ?

Green light

• What are the deliverables with a absolute deadline, or priority, or risk? Do the delay and the remain work to be done trustable in terms of problems already encountered on the deliverable, based on available staff resources ?

• Is the manager of the deliverable in trouble on other deliverables? Is he reliable in terms of activities on previous deliverables? Is the physical progress consistent in relation with the cost expenses ?

Orange light

• An action plan has-it been implemented? What are the impacts on delays, resources, requirements, and costs ?

• Should we change the characteristics of deliverable planning: adding extra time? Changing in staffing? Adding new requirements ?

Red light

• How long an alert has been posted on the deliverable? Why doesn’t the action plan change the status of deliverable ?

• What are the dependant deliverables? What are the solutions to avoid penalizing the project's progress ?

• Should we change the characteristics of deliverable planning: extra time? change in staffing? requests for changes in requirements ?




BCE and CGR contribute to delay management: real-time processing of

the bottlenecks

Organizing action plans for deliverables under penalty warning about all related deliverables which will be in

orange or red. In consequence, it is necessary to reschedule all or part of the project.





Monitoring depending on lights, drifts, ....



…. And also workload planning




Communigram project reporting

To ease the control and allow project monitoring closer to the most

critical aspects of the project

Bridging data into BI tools from the schedule system management and budget system management

of the customer (if needed)

Control the projects from the control checklist (blue, green, orange, red)

Restarting resources that are behind their schedule in the processing of their messages or their alerts

via Communigram mail service

Asking the contributors of information available on detected exceptions

Going over the exceptions to the PMO in charge of projects and subprojects

Preparing periodic reports (daily, weekly, monthly) for the project team and managers




Tracking Example: Evolution of the expected and delivered deliverables

9 8

2316

37

63

26

4032

1727

12 12

34

13

28

1 1 19 8

2214

25

120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

917

40

56

93

156

182

222

254

271

298310

322

356

369

397 398 399 400

917

39

53

7890 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Attendus

Livres

attendus cumulés

livrés cumulés

The number of expected deliverables declines significantly from April




Tracking Example: Evolution of alarms: reducing the number of red lights but

increasing yellow lights

38

vert jaune rouge bleu annulé vert jaune rouge bleu annulé

Chant ier Interfaces 7 2 14 4 27 4 2 2 14 4 26

Chant ier Conduite du Changement 21 2 3 4 1 31 27 1 3 1 32

Chant ier Données 23 1 9 33 19 5 8 32

Chant ier MOAT 7 1 9 1 18 4 1 8 1 14

Chant ier Recet tes 32 2 3 16 3 56 26 1 5 14 3 49

chant ier Trans it ion 10 2 4 1 17 10 1 2 1 1 15

Chant ier Urbanisme 3 3 6 4 1 1 6

Intégrat ion & Qualif icat ion

COSY 58 7 9 74 41 6 5 52

GEC 17 2 4 23 17 2 3 22

SAR 16 2 3 21 16 2 3 21

S2

Equipe Flux 3 3 3 1 4

SGE 6 6 1 9 22 6 6 1 10 23

PRM 16 4 20 16 4 20

SI_Coordonnés 13 4 17 13 4 17

Opérat ions Intégrat ion

PMO pall ierS2 4 1 5 4 1 5

tous responsables confondus 220 23 31 89 10 373 194 18 40 76 10 338

situation au 14 03 2010 situation au 07 03 2010




Tracking Example: Analysis per site of average delays of completed

deliverables

9,7

2,3

6,6

-2,3

2,9

5,8

8,0

4,3

3,3

2,0

4,5

8,07,1

10

3

9 9

15

43

9

4

1

43

9

-4,0

-2,0

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0 profil des retards moyens de livraison des livrables terminés par chantier

retards moyen

Nombre de livrables livrés




Tracking Example: Evolution of red lights per site

Chantier Conduite du …Chantier Données

Chantier InterfacesChantier MOAT

Chantier Recetteschantier Transition

Chantier UrbanismeCOSY

Equipe FluxGEC

Intégration & QualificationOpérations Intégration

PMO pallierS2PRM

S2 SAR

SGESI_Coordonnés

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Chantier Conduite du Changement

Chantier Données

Chantier Interfaces

Chantier MOAT

Chantier Recettes

chantier Transition

Chantier Urbanisme

COSY

Equipe Flux

GEC

Intégration & Qualification

Opérations Intégration

PMO pallierS2

PRM

S2

SAR

SGE

SI_Coordonnés




Tracking Example: Analysis of delivery delays of completed deliverables

The 50 weeks, early on a schedule, at the end of the general design are probably due to an error in the ending date

Number of weeks on time, behind

or ahead

Number of deliverables

General profile of the average delivery delays




Tracking example: managing risk management: keep inform management in

real-time about the project

Making available to the Project Management, project

views for understanding its evolution on a portal

Keep the management informed about the critical

elements that require quick decisions




Project reporting, it is also : synthesis to inform and to decide

PHASE « Zéro » SEMAINE 11 Janvier 2010

TOP 5 ACTVITES ACCOMPLIES PLANNING

1. Comité de Pilotage : présentation des synthèses Revue

AX Mentor et Résultats des Stress Tests

2. Réunion Digitas : présentation des résultats des Stress

Tests et organisation réunion de travail avec TVH,

Avanade et Digitats le mardi 19 janvier

3. Réunion de validation du Cahier des charges Phase 1 le

lundi 18 janvier: CDC validé par JB Franck, A.Maurin,

A.Poupard et JM Henry. CDC envoyé aux intégrateurs le

18 janvier par A.Poupard

4. Analyse des logs par AVA, TVH, DIGITAS suite à Stress

Tests en vue de la préparation de la réunion du 19

Jalons Clés Status Commentaire

Inventaire Il reste quelques anomalies à requalifier

Transport AIF Outil validé par Microsoft

Transport Global Retard ; en attente des tests RAJA

et de la validation Microsoft

Interfaces

Synchrones

Utilisation AIF validé. Il reste à définir les modalités de prise en

charge des recommandations

Interfaces

Asynchrones

Retard ; à planifier avec AX Mentor (en cours)

Stress tests Nouvelle vague de tests à réaliser

avec corrections préalables

CONTRAT & BUDGET

INDICATEUR STATUS COMMENTAIRE LIVRABLES

Contrat Contrat 1er – Microsoft

Contrat Maintenance TVH INDICATEUR STATUS COMMENTAIRE

Proposition

En attente de validation de la

proposition Phase 0 d’Avanade Avancement des

livraisons

Retard phase 0 d’un mois avec

nouveau risque décalage suite

aux stress tests

Cahier des

Charges

CDC Phase 1 Avancement des

validations

A suivre semaine prochaine

tests RAJA sur procédure de

transport

Budget

AX Mentor : Financement de la suite ?

Changements

Plan d’actions sur stress tests N°2 > date de fin indéterminée

dans l’attente de la réunion du

20 janvier

Facturation

En attente de validation de la proposition phase 0

Problèmes sur en

cours

Stress Tests : difficultés pour évaluer temps de correction en

pré-requis 2nd vague de tests

Réclamation RAS

TOP 5 RISQUES

RANG COURANT RANG S-1 NBRE DE S RISQUES COMMENTAIRES

1 Architecture non validée

2 Date de fin de la phase 0 Risque de dérapage de 2 à 4 semaines

3

Délai de négociation sur prise en

charge non qualité avec Ava et TVH

Non démarré

4 Propriété intellectuelle TVH Pré-requis phase 1

5 Date de lancement phase 1 Dépend aussi de la capacité de TVH et d’AVA

à travailler ensemble

TOP 5 PROCHAINES ETAPES

1 19 janvier : réunion de travail sur analyse stress tests avec Digitas, TVH et Avanade plan d’actions

2 19 janvier : conf call avec AX Mentor sur suite mission d’étude Interface Asynchrones

3 20 janvier : conf call avec dept produit AIF de MS sur évolutions AIF

4 22 janvier : livraison prévue de nombreux livrables Avanade pour préparer clôture phase 0

5 25 janvier : réunion avec intégrateur pour répondre aux questions posées sur CDC




OUTLINE



3. Example of the possible use of Communigram for COSY and Palier S2 Syclade

program


3.2 The resources

3.3 The projects






Scenario demonstration

Jointly viewing the Pallier CGR and COSY CGR (including all deliverables out 3)

In COSY

• Creating resources

• Adding three deliverables

• Creating a milestone

• Allocating resources

• Creating date elements and workload

• Viewing the workloads

• Managing the criticality

• Seeing the impact on the progress curve (before and after)

• Creating intra-COSY links for 3 deliverables

• Create links with le Pallier

Report progress

• Light setting

• Sending documents to COSY clients and to Pallier

• Validating documents internal to COSY

• Validating documents with the Pallier




OUTLINE





3.2 The resources

3.3 The projects


4. In conclusion, the issues to be addressed to effectively implement and use

Communigram




The Key Issues to solve to build up an efficient Communigram

Finalizing the detail of deliverable tracking, differentiating what is available from what is milestone

• Differentiation according to criticality

• Differentiation according to the degree of operational control,,

Identify / determine the manager for each deliverable

Who is the unique manager for each deliverable ?

Adjusting dependencies between deliverables

• Constraints for handling planning drifts and evaluation of the decision impacts

Identifying the mandatory dates - only critical milestones (starting, GoNoGo, ..)

• Working out the early dates of deliverables

Finalizing the governance rules and reporting PMO Steering

Identifying the cultural impact of thought changes:

• Nothing to say until the last moment « I'm at 95% completion,….

• Blaming the hierarchy

Knowing the dates of early deliverables




Documents

Business Communication Engineering & Communigram...• SAP (cProjects, cFolders, PS,..) This ... is a tool that translates these concepts … and keeping it simple! BCE and CGR integrate