THE PROPOSED INJECTIONS
3.6 THE FRT FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT MANAGEMENT MODEL
The FRT is discussed in the following narrative and should be followed next to figure 28 (a) and (b).
The different steps in the FRT are numbered (numbers are indicated in brackets) to make it easier for the reader to follow.
If the stage gate system and funnel concept with strategically placed value buffers is introduced (301), and any flow of project work from the value buffers is initiated by a key resource made possible by the Critical Chain multi-project management approach (302), then the effect will be that all project work wait in the value buffers, before being worked on by key resources (303).
If all project work wait in the value buffers before being worked on by key resources (303), and these projects in the value buffers are seen as monetary value (305), together with the injection that management review the status of these value buffers (304), it will lead to the result that all the project value in the system is known (306).
At this stage the assumption is made that in the Critical Chain environment, the work rate according to the system’s constraint is the most productive (309). Furthermore, the value buffers are sized to ensure that these key resources are not starved for work, taking into account the estimated value buffer consumption and replenishment time (308). In addition to this, management also does resource scheduling across the two macro processes of the project life cycle (307). The foregoing causes will then have the effect that enough project work in value buffers is available to ensure that the key resources always have project work in the near future (310).
If CCMPM allows for approved projects in the value buffer to be staggered on a time line with aggressive lead time estimates for activities and these activities are scheduled around the key resource (311), and a pull trigger is introduced which is initiated by the key resource drawing work from the final value buffer (312), then the effect will be that project work is pulled from the final value buffer by the key resources; and a pull trigger is initiated (313).
If project work is pulled from the final value buffer by the key resources (313) and a project from the upstream value buffer is released as a result of downstream pull trigger (314), then the result will be that the replenishment of the value buffer as a result of the pull trigger only maintain the amount of work in the project stage equal to the size of the downstream value buffer (315).
Any flow of project work from the value buffers is initiated by a key resource made possible by the Critical Chain multi-project management approach (302).
Introduce strategically placed value buffers within Cooper’s stage gate process and the development funnel of Wheelwright and Clark (301).
In the Critical Chain environment the work rate according to the system’s constraint is the most productive (309).
All project work wait in the value buffers, before being worked on by key resources (303).
Management review status of these value buffers (304).
All the project value in the system is known (306).
Project work is pulled from the final value buffer by the key resources – the pull trigger is initiated (313).
Projects in value buffers are seen as monetary value (305).
Management do resource scheduling over the two macro processes (307).
Value buffers are sized to ensure key resources are not starved for work, taking into account the estimated value buffer consumption and replenishment time (308).
Enough project work in value buffers is available to ensure that key resources always have project work in the near future (310).
CCMPM allows for approved projects in value buffer to be staggered on a time line with aggressive lead time estimates for activities and are scheduled around the key resource (311).
Project from the upstream value buffer is released as a result of downstream pull trigger (314).
Pull trigger is introduced, which is initiated by the key resource drawing work from the final value buffer (312).
Replenishment of value buffer as a result of the pull trigger maintains the amount of work in the project stage equal to the size of the downstream value buffer (315).
Figure 28 (a): The Future Reality Tree.
At this stage, if the assumption is made that the projects in the management system is phased similarly (319) and, if management find it necessary, the work stage preceding value buffer could be expedited, in order to shorten replenishment time of value buffer (316), then it will lead to the effect that the available project work for key resources will fluctuate around the maximum level of the value buffers (320). This in turn will have the effect that the project value in the whole system is known to management (306).
If project priorities determine the sequence of release for the next project stage (318), and the buffer time allows for project reprioritization (317), then organizations will be able to respond better to changed priorities in project work (321).
If the project work for key resources fluctuates around the maximum level of the value buffer (320) and organizations are able to respond better to changed priorities in project work (321), then the result will be that the reliability in production for the system increases (325).
At this stage, if CCMPM allows for approved projects in value buffer to have aggressive lead time estimates for activities and these activities are scheduled around the key resource (323) and the assumption is made that multi-tasking in the multi-project environment is minimised when Critical Chain multi-project scheduling is used (322), then the effect will be that the overall project lead time will decrease (324).
Project lead time decreasing and the reliability in production increasing will then lead to the result that productivity of the system increases (326).
An increase in the productivity of the system (326) will result in the throughput value of the projects increasing (332). An increase in productivity will also result in another positive effect - a faster client response rate (327). If a fast client response rate (327) is present and the assumption is made that clients demand priority of their work (328), then the result will be that clients will be happy (330). The foregoing will have another positive effect in the sense that the clients have an increased perception of value for the product (329).
If clients are happy (330) and an increased perception of value is present (329), then more sales and higher prices will be at the order of the day (331). More sales and higher prices will then increase the throughput value of the projects (332).
Replenishment of value buffer as a result of the pull trigger maintain the amount of work in the project stage equal to the size of the downstream value buffer (315).
The projects in the management system is phased similarly (319).
Work stage preceding value buffer could be expedited, to shorten replenishment time of value buffer (316).
Available project work for key resources will fluctuate around the maximum level of the value buffers (320) – (306).
Buffer time allows for project reprioritization within the value buffer (317).
Project priorities determine the sequence of release for the next project stage (318).
Organization able to respond better to changed priorities in project work (321).
Reliability in production increases (325).
CCMPM allows for approved projects in value buffer to have aggressive lead time estimates for activities and are scheduled around the key resource (323).
Productivity of the system increases (326).
Fast client response rate (327).
Multi tasking is minimised when CC multi-project scheduling is used (322).
Project lead times decrease (324).
Clients demand priority of their work (328).
Happy Clients (330). Increased perception of value (329).
More sales and higher prices (331).
Increase the TV of the projects (332).
Figure 28 (b): The Future Reality Tree (continued).