Program Architecture and Adaptation

Transcription

1 Program Architecture and Adaptation Tyson Browning Texas Christian University TysonBrowning.com January 2007

2 Introduction Situation: Large, complex programs Result: information overload for managers Filtering problems Need: to handle complexity, more quickly, through Self-coordination and adaptation in the workforce Better decision support models Better information filters Programs designed so that maximum value emerges 2

3 Five Program s or Domains Five systems, each with an architecture, together form a metaarchitecture or program architecture. Most literature addresses only one of these five systems individually. Not surprising, since each is quite complex in its own right. But what may be optimal for each system individually may not be optimal for the project as a whole (or for the multi-project enterprise). Programs Goal Goal Goal Product Tool 3 Source: Browning et al. (2006)

4 Capability Molecule Product Goal Tool Just as the properties of a molecule differ from those of its individual elements, so do the properties of a project differ from those of its individual systems. Using the same process, org, or tools on multiple projects does not guarantee that each will have the same outcome. Some of this variance comes from exogenous effects, while some comes from different interactions among the systems. 4

5 The Design Structure Matrix A B C D E F G H I Element A A Element B B Element C C Element D D Element E E Element F F Element G G Element H H Element I I I N OUTPUTS U T S A square matrix showing relationships between elements Shaded, diagonal squares represent the elements Off-diagonal marks represent a relationship Read across a row to see where the element provides something Read down a column to see where the element receives something 5 Figure 2001 IEEE, from (Browning, 2001)

6 Program Architecture Framework Project Goals (g x g) Goals / Product (g x p) Goals / (g x n) Goals / (g x o) Goals / (g x t) Product Components (p x p) Product / (p x n) Product / (p x o) Product / (p x t) Activities (n x n) / (n x o) / (n x t) A Periodic Table of DSMs and DMMs Units (o x o) Org. / (o x t) 6 Adapted from (Danilovic & Browning, 2007) Project (t x t)

7 Emergence Cycle Desired Outcomes (Goals) Gap Tolerance Ability to Change Goal Value Gap Desire to Change Change Actions Product Tool New Outcome Actual Outcomes (Value) Speed of Recognition Rate of Change 7

8 Value as a Function of Structure? Value Curve 1 Benefit and Value Value Curve 2 Value Curve 3 No or Structure Insurgency Army Unit Highly Procedural 8

9 Two Pairs of Case Studies Less Structured More Structured Insurgency US Army Google Microsoft Adapt by increasing structure Adapt by decreasing structure 9

10 Army Adaptation Chart Before Adaptation After Goals Maintain stability in assigned sector, including Route Irish Increased patrol presence, 24 hour operations on Route Irish Maintain security and presence on Route Irish in particular Product or Service Relative stability within sector, but increasing attacks on Route Irish Refined lines of operations, increase in patrols and presence Attacks decreased immediately Maintain presence; set up random traffic control points; counter-mortar patrols; Route Irish presence part of natural patrol route Increased combat power on route Removing stopped vehicles; almost 90% of combat power on Route Irish; continuous patrol presence on route Hierarchal, Vertical Increased information sharing and flow Bradley Fighting Vehicles, M1 Abrams, Up-Armored HUMVEES Improved systems to defeat IEDs Increased network connectivity to troop command posts; improved information flow Increased capabilities, Warlock systems 10