Ron Mascitelli's workshop presentation on applying lean to new product development. AME 2009 Conference. (6.25)

1. Lean Product Development
Workshop
Prepared and presented by –
Ron Mascitelli, PMP
President
Technology Perspectives
Phone: (818) 366-7488
Copyright 2009 – E-mail: techper@att.net
Technology Perspectives
1
WEB: www.Design-for-Lean.com
All Rights Reserved Version 1.09L Revised – 6.25.09
Agenda
“Visioning” a Lean Product Development Process
Practical Learning –
The Market Requirements Event
Visual Workflow Management
2
Copyright 2009 -

2. The Three Dimensions of Excellence in
Product Design and Development
Lean Product Design –
• Design for Manufacture
• Toyota “3P” Process
Production Cost
Lean Innovation –
• Value Engineering
• Rapid Innovation
• Scenario • Design for Six Sigma
Brainstorming
• Set-Based Design
e
ric
Time-to-Market
P
et
rk
Ma
Lean Product Development –
Slashing Time-to-Market and
Improving Resource Utilization
is the Focus of this Workshop
3
Copyright 2008 -
What is Lean Product Development?
It’s all about “productivity” -
= Profits generated per hour of design time
= Efficient utilization of designers / developers
= Faster time-to-market
= More projects completed per unit time
= Higher profits for your firm
= More customers satisfied more of the time
= More fun for designers who are freed from
wasteful, boring activities.
Our enemy is wasted time…
Lean Product Development provides both the
mindset and the tools to fight back!
4
Copyright 2009 -

3. Why Tolerate Waste?
Error Loops
Profit? Unnecessary Steps
Poor Handoffs
Undefined Roles
Low Value Meetings
Non-Value-
Added Lack of Information
Revenue
Work Missed Target Costs
Excessive Multitasking
Lack of Prioritization
Constant Interruptions
Value-Added
Work Wasted Time May Represent Your
Biggest Product Development Cost!
Copyright 2008 -
“Top Ten” Sources of
Product Development Waste
Chaotic work environment – constant interruptions
Lack of available resources – resource bottlenecks
Lack of clear prioritization of projects / tasks
Poor communication across functional barriers
Poorly defined product requirements
Disruptive changes to product requirements
Lack of early consideration of manufacturability
Over-designing, analysis paralysis, gold-plating
Too many @!%&* meetings
E-mail overload – the “e-mail avalanche”
6
Copyright 2009 -

4. Identifying Non-Value-Added Waste
“A design / development activity is value-added if it transforms
a new product design (or the essential deliverables needed
to commercialize it) such that either the product’s
profit margin and / or market share are positively impacted.”
Based on this (strict) definition of value, we can divide the activities
of any development project into three categories:
Value = Value-added (essential) tasks
Type 1 (Enabler) = Non-value-added (NVA) but currently necessary
Type 2 (Waste) = NVA and not necessary
7
Copyright 2008 -
Waste Elimination Through Lean Methods
Current State –
Value Type 1 Enablers Type 2 Waste
Lean “Future State” –
Our goal is to eliminate Type 2 wherever possible, and minimize
the waste in Type 1’s through the use of Lean Methods.
8
Copyright 2009 -

5. The “Over-the-Wall” Development Process
“Over-the-Wall” is a leftover of commodity mass
production and is the enemy of speed and innovation...
Revised Specifications Engineering Change Orders
Failed Prototype Unacceptable Unit Cost
New Specs “Finished” Design
Launch
Marketing Engineering Manufacturing
9
Copyright 2009 -
The “Phase / Gate” Development Process
The “Phase / Gate” product development process was
developed for NASA and DOD “megaprojects” to reduce technical
risk and coordinate vast numbers of sub-contractors...
Gate 1 Gate 2 Gate 3 Gate 4
Concept/
Planning Design Prototyping Execution Verification
Redesign Eng. Change Eng. Change
The Phase / Gate process can be used as a transition stage from
“over-the-wall” development, but it is not an end in itself!
10
Copyright 2009 -

6. Potential Sources of Waste in a “Typical”
Phase / Gate Process
TOO MANY GATE REVIEWS
TOO MANY PROCESS-MANDATED ACTIVITIES
PROCESS DRAINS TIME FROM VALUE CREATION
PROCESS IS DIFFICULT TO SCALE DOWN
PHASES / GATES DISTORT THE CRITICAL PATH
In short, phase / gate is heavy on command and control,
but doesn’t define an efficient way to design and
develop a new product!
Copyright 2008 -
Attributes of a Lean Development Process
Focus of process is on transformation of information, not
on artificial structure and heavy-handed governance.
An event-driven approach simplifies collaboration and
enables design optimization.
Emphasis on proactively managing risks to schedule, cost,
performance, and quality.
Can be scaled to any size project, from a one or two person
“team” to a major development effort.
Simple, often visual tools are used to capture learning, track
progress, set priorities, and solve problems.
A process based on the philosophy that
information and learning must “flow without interruption”.
12
Copyright 2009 -

7. Overview of a Lean
Product Development Process
Optional
Decision
Market Rqmts. Planning / Risk Points
Market Position Basic Project Plan
Start Segmentation D Milestone Schedule D
Prioritized Rqmts. Risk Mgmt. Plan
Prioritized Features Mitigation Actions
Lean Workflow Management
3P/Cost Reduc. Design Review Prod. Readiness
Production Plan Prototype Data Factory Layout
Purchasing Plan D Design Validation D Supply Chain
Value Engineering Cost Validation Test / Inspection
Innov. Brainstorming Design Freeze Launch Plan
Milestone “Floating” Events
“Events” Make Money!
Innovative
VoC
Problem-
Workshop 13
Solving Copyright 2009 -
A Practical, Common-Sense Approach
to Slashing Waste
“Common Sense is genius dressed in its working clothes.”
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
“Common Sense is something that you already know...
once someone points it out to you.”
- Ron Mascitelli
=
14
Copyright 2009 -

8. Agenda
“Visioning” a Lean Product Development Process
Practical Learning –
The Market Requirements Event
Visual Workflow Management
15
Copyright 2009 -
What Constitutes a
Great New Product Opportunity?
Highly Manageable
Differentiated Risk
Aligned Leverages
with Core Great
Manufacturing
Competencies Product Capability
Supports High Net
Firm’s Strategic Present Value
Direction (NPV)
16
Copyright 2009 -

9. Product Requirements Must be Driven by
How Customers Perceive Value
Categories of Product Value Relative
Product Examples Market Price
Performance Esteem Scarcity Retained Value
Paper Clip
Gold Tie Clasp
Tap Water
Imported Bottled Water
Decorative Wall Poster
Original Oil Painting
Tickets to Local Movie Theater
Tickets to See Bruce Springsteen
Magnetic Compass
Portable GPS Locator
Generic Office Software
Fully Customized Office Software
Digital Alarm Clock
Swiss Grandfather Clock
Copyright 2008 -
Overshoot or Undershoot of Customer Needs
Creates Waste
Region of Optimized
Profit Margin
Profit Margin
Missed Value Performance /
Opportunities Feature Overshoot
Cost of Performance or Added Features
18
Copyright 2009 -

10. A Lean Starting Point for Any Project –
The Market Requirements Brief
1. Product Designation: ____________________________________________________
2. What specific customer problem(s) does the product solve?
_______________________________________________________________
3. Who are the target customers?
_______________________________________________________________
4. “Most Likely” Sales Volumes:
Year 1 = _________ Year 2 = __________ Year 3 = ___________
5. Target Market Price: __________________ (dollars per unit)
6. Target Manufacturing Cost: __________________ (dollars per unit)
7. Target Market Entry Date: __________________
8. Overt Benefits / Key Attributes:
i. _____________________________________________________________ A one-page
ii. _____________________________________________________________ concise
9. Critical Physical Characteristics: summary!
i. (Example: Weight)
ii. (Example: Dimensions)
10. Critical Performance Requirements:
i. ________________________________________________
ii. ________________________________________________
11. Critical Features:
i. ________________________________________________
ii. ________________________________________________
12. Other Critical Requirements or Constraints:
i. ________________________________________________
ii. ________________________________________________
19
Copyright 2009 -
The Market Requirements Event
Objective –
To transform voice-of-the-customer (market) data
Into a prioritized list of product design requirements that
maximize customer value, market acceptance, and profits.
Key Outputs –
Market Positioning Statement
Top Five Customer Benefits / Key Differentiators
Prioritized List of Features & Performance Levels
Action Assignments to Execute the Above
20
Copyright 2009 -

11. Preparation for
The Market Requirements Event
Initial Product Concepts
Customer Survey / Interview Data
Info. on Competitors’ Products = Essential Inputs
Customer Satisfaction Data = Valuable Inputs
Warrantee / Return Data
Target Cost / Price
Manufacturing Constraints
Target Customer Group / Segment
Projected Capital Requirements
Assessment of Technical Risks
Assessment of Market Risks
Strategic Goals for New Product
21
Copyright 2009 -
Recommended Participants for
The Market Requirements Event
LPD "Events"
Market Planning / Risk 3P / Cost Design Review & Production
Functional Role Requirements Mitigation Reduction Freeze Readiness
Team Leader
Core Team Members
Functional Supervisors
Functional Managers
Marketing Manager
Production Supervisor
Production Manager
Line Operators
Procurement
Supply-Chain
Quality Engineering
Cost Accounting
Mfg. / Process Engineers
Strategic Suppliers
Sales Representatives
Test Engineering
Packaging Designer
Lean Champions 22
Copyright 2009 -

12. Typical Agenda for the
Market Requirements Event
8:00 – 9:00 Overview of Available Customer Data
9:00 – 12:00 Part 1 – Define a Market Position
- Market Positioning Statement
- Identify the “Top Five” Benefits
1:00 – 3:30 Part 2 – Prioritize Requirements & Features
- Round 1 Lean VoC (High Level)
- Compare Outputs to Mkt. Position
- Round 2 Lean VoC (Refine)
3:30 – 4:00 Define Prioritized List of Features / Rqmts.
4:00 – 4:30 Update Master Action List for Concept Design
4:30 – 5:00 Management Outbriefing
One day is the minimum that should be allowed for
the Market Requirements Event – two or more days may
be needed for large or complex projects! 23
Copyright 2009 -
What Does “Market Positioning” Mean?
A product’s “position” in the market is its unique
combination of performance / features, price, and quality.
Ideally, that position is large and well-defined enough to
provide a robust business case.
Competitors’ Products
Quality
Your
Product
Price
Pe
rfo
rm
an
ce
/F
ea
tu
24
re
Copyright 2009 -
s

13. The Market Positioning Statement
A market positioning statement (aka, “value proposition”)
is a one or two sentence phrase that captures the who, what, and
why of your new product.
WHO is the intended target market for the product?
WHAT are the benefits that the new product provides?
WHY would a customer buy your product over others?
Example: “The new Model XYZ Speedboat represents a
breakthrough in performance, appearance, and
sport technology, that targets youthful, affluent,
waterskiing and scuba-diving enthusiasts. With
nearly twice the acceleration, a lightweight all-
carbon-fiber hull, and a three-color gel-coat finish
the Model XYZ is as fast as it is eye-catching.” 25
Copyright 2009 -
What are the “Top Five” Key Differentiators?
Our goal for this Event is to translate customer needs
into prioritized design requirements for your new product.
Key Diff. #1
Key Diff. #2
Customer Prioritized
Needs Key Diff. #3 Design
Requirements
Key Diff. #4
Key Diff. #5
The “Top Five” Key Differentiators are the five
greatest opportunities for your product to succeed 26
in the marketplace – in the customers’ own language! Copyright 2009 -

14. A Tool to Identify the
“Top Five” Key Differentiators
Degree to which market
Relevance needs are totally satisfied Differentiation
Possible key to buying (N = Percent Satisfied) Opportunity
differentiators decision R
(customer benefits) ( R=1 to 3 ) Your Current Competitor Competitor D =
Product Product A Product B Max. N
3 = High Best estimates based on Top five scores
Brainstorm on 2 = Med. market data and 27
are your
Copyright 2009 - these! 1 = Low team’s knowledge “Top Five”
Worked Example for a Speedboat Product
Degree to Which Market
Relevance Needs are Totally Satisfied Differentiation
Possible Key to Buying (N = Percent Satisfied) Opportunity
Differentiators Decision R
(Customer Benefits) ( R=1 to 3 ) Your Current Competitor Competitor D =
Product Product A Product B Max. N
High Top Speed 3 50% 60% 70% 4.3 *
Rapid Acceleration 2 20% 30% 40% 5.0 *
High Towing Capacity 2 80% 90% 90% 2.2
Gas Mileage 1 40% 50% 30% 2.0
Appearance 3 50% 40% 50% 6.0 *
Safety 2 90% 90% 80% 2.2
Supports Scuba Diving 1 10% 20% 20% 5.0 *
Supports Waterskiing 3 30% 20% 40% 7.5 *
* These are the “Top Five” Key Differentiators for this product. 28
Copyright 2009 -

15. Harnessing the “Voice-of-the-Customer (VoC)”
First we enter the Top Five Differentiators in the appropriate
locations (see next slide for a template).
These benefits are “weighted” by their potential to
differentiate the new product (the “D* score”).
Next we list possible features, functions, or performance
levels that the design team believes address
the Top Five Differentiators.
Finally, we score each feature / function on a -5 to +5 scale,
based on its impact on each of Key Differentiators.
The cumulative weighted score across each row represents
that feature / function’s priority in the new product
design.
29
Copyright 2009 -
The Lean VoC Tool
“Top Five” Key Differentiators
Priority Ranking
Weighted Score
Cumulative
Weighting Factors
for “Top Five” Differentiators
( D score)
that Could Deliver Key Differentiators
Possible Features / Performance Levels
30
Copyright 2009 -

16. Worked Example Using the Lean VoC Tool
“Top Five” Key Differentiators
Rapid Acceleration
Priority Ranking
Weighted Score
High Top Speed
Supports Scuba
Cumulative
For a
Waterskiing
Appearance
Speedboat
Supports
Product
that Could Deliver Key Differentiators
Possible Features / Performance Levels
4.3 5.0 6.0 5.0 7.5
200 HP Engine 2 2 0 0 3 41.1 X
400 HP Twin Engines 5 5 0 0 5 69.0 1
Split Hull Design -1 -3 1 2 -1 -10.8 X
Carbon Fiber Hull 3 3 0 0 2 42.9 3
Nitrous Oxide Injectors 5 5 0 0 1 54.0 2
3-color Gel-Coat Finish 0 0 5 0 0 30.0 5
Optional Scuba Deck -1 -2 -2 5 2 13.7 7
Automated Tow Rope Feed 0 0 0 0 5 37.5 4
Custom Storage for Gear 0 0 -1 3 2 24.0 6
Fish-Finder Sonar 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 X 31
Copyright 2009 -
Do You Need to Match the Competition?
In addition to differentiating your product from competitors,
you may need to match one or more attributes of
their products to ensure parity in non-differentiating
aspects of your new product.
The goal is to avoid a “negative” that might dissatisfy a customer
and cause you to lose market share or pricing power.
Examples include:
Achieving the same approvals, certifications, etc.
as your top competitors.
Meeting industry standards for interfaces, outputs, etc.
Updating technologies to avoid giving an edge to
your competition.
Matching your top competitor’s basic features or
performance levels. Copyright 2009 -

17. The Final Step: Setting Clear Priorities
for Product Features / Performance Levels
33
Copyright 2009 -
Applications of
Must / Should / Could Prioritization
Prioritization of
Prioritization of Key
Optional Product
Performance Targets
Features
Must / Should /
Could Prioritization
Prioritization of Establishment of
Product Versions, M/S/C levels for Testing,
Sizes, etc. Quality, Defects, etc.
34
Copyright 2009 -

18. Cost / Schedule Problems Can Be Solved by
Trimming “Could-Haves”
If Project Schedule Slips
Beginning of Project or Cost Grow
Highest priority
Must
requirements or
Haves
features are front-end
loaded to allow
scope flexibility
Should at the end of project.
Haves
Could
Haves Scope reduced
to meet target cost
or time-to-market goals
35
Copyright 2009 -
Identifying Must / Should / Could Priorities
Highest scoring features / performance levels
from Lean VoC, plus…
Key requirements that ensure parity with
competitors’ products.
Middle scoring features / performance levels
from Lean VoC, plus…
Key requirements that increase the product’s
strategic fit or commonality with other
products from your firm.
Lower scoring features / performance levels
from Lean VoC, plus…
Relatively high risk “innovations” that might
delight the customer, but are unproven
or optional. 36
Copyright 2009 -

19. Prioritized Requirements for Our Worked Example
Engineering Requirements Brief
Value or Priority
Key Requirement
Description Must Should Could
Power Plant 400 HP Twin Gasoline Engines X
Carburetion Nitrous Oxide Fuel Injection X
Hull Material 3-Layer Carbon Fiber Composite X
Navigation * Next Generation Global GPS X
Communications * XYZ S-to-S Radio with Beacon X
Certifications * UL Certification on all Electronics X
Length * 20 ft. < Length < 24 ft. X
Towing System Automated Feed, Constant Tension X
Hull Finish 3-color Catalyzed Gel Coat X
Drive Train * Common with Model SB15 X
Spar Structure * Common with Model SB32 X
Trailer * Standard Model T24 X
Storage Customized for Scuba / Skiing X
Optional Equip. Optional / Removable Scuba Deck X
* Additional requirements driven by need for parity with competition or 37
Copyright 2009 -
to achieve internal commonality and cost reduction.
Critical Output:
The “Master Action List” Maintains Team Focus
The “Master Action List” is created, maintained and
updated throughout the project to track long-term actions and
manage “unplanned work”.
Responsible Planned Actual Priority
Event Actions / Risk Mitigation
Team Completion Completion (High, Comments
Actions Date Date
Member Med., Low)
Assemble Prototype Kits in Advance Jane M. 4/27/09 High Some parts are still missing
Get Feedback on Draft Test Plan Joe P. 5/1/09 5/8/09 Med. Complete
Run Alternative Circuit Simulations Cedrick M. 5/1/09 High Need Resources!!
Make Reservations with Key Suppliers Joline Q. 5/5/09 Med.
Give Customer Early Perf. Feedback Harry P. 5/10/09 Low
Verify Availability of Lab Technicians Dave N. 5/10/09 Low
38
Copyright 2009 -

20. Agenda
“Visioning” a Lean Product Development Process
Practical Learning –
The Market Requirements Event
Visual Workflow Management
39
Copyright 2009 -
An Integrated System for
Workflow Management
Stand-up meetings, combined
with visual project board
allow for optimized team
communication and
efficiency.
Visual board can be Stand-up Meeting
made available to team
members at other
locations by either using
a webcam, or by posting
a digital picture of the
board on the intranet.
Visual Project Board 40
Copyright 2009 -
(Obeya “Light”)

21. Element #1 –
The Management Status Tool
Planned Actual
Responsible Cost Schedule Tech.
Key Milestone Completion Completion Comments
Team Member Status Status Status
Date Date
Fabricate Prototype David Copperfield 6/7/09 6/7/09 G G G Complete
Prototype Testing Oliver Twist 4/5/09 G Y Y First Test Failed
Prototype Validated Tiny Tim 3/14/09 R R Y May Require Rework
Production Tooling Charles Darney 4/24/09 G R G Supplier Issues
Test Plan Complete Sydney Carton 4/20/09 Y Y G Resources Unavailable
Final Drawing Release Lucy Mannette 5/17/09 G G G
Fabricate Qual Units Charles Dickens 6/14/2009 G G G
41
Copyright 2009 -
An A3-Based Management Status
Template
Copyright 2009 -

22. Substitute for Management Status Tool:
The Multi-Project “Cadence” Tool
Project Kickoff Milestone Number Completion Date
Designation Date 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Plan Est. Actual
10/1/08
Project 1 1/2/09 R 1/2/10 6/5/10
11/20/08
9/24/08
Project 2 3/5/09 Y 3/5/11 3/5/11
Plan
10/5/08
7/1/08
Project 3 2/5/08 R 10/5/09 5/13/10
11/1/08 9/20/08
Actual
Project 4 5/2/09 G 8/19/10 8/19/10
11/1/08
10/1/08
Other? 10/3/07 Y 5/13/09 5/13/09
11/20/08
Key 1. Engineering Spec Complete 5. Critical Design Review / Approval
Milestone 2. Conceptual Design Review / Approval 6. Long Lead Items Ordered
Definitions: 3. Prototype Performance Validated 7. Qualification Testing Complete / Approv.
4. Drawing Pkg. Rev. 0 Released 8. Release to Production
Copyright 2008 -
Element #2 –
Team Master Action List
Responsible Completion
Action Item Due Date Comments
Team Member Date Priority
Create prototype parts kit Jane M. 4/27/09 High Parts missing
Draft test plan out for review Joe P. 5/1/09 5/8/09 Med Complete
Complete circuit simulation Cedrick M. 5/1/09 High Need Resources!!
Order injection-mold tooling Joline Q. 5/5/09 Med
Meet with key supplier Harry P. 5/10/09 Low
Prepare for customer meeting Dave N. 5/10/09 Low
44
Copyright 2009 -

23. Center Section of Visual Board:
The “Wall Gantt”
Horizontal axis represents days
of the week or weeks of the
month
Vertical axis represents team
members available for project
work (including extended team)
Actions are placed at junction
between responsible team
member and due date
Colored “pull cards” can be used
to identify required actions,
with color used to indicate
priority or type of activity
45
Copyright 2009 -
A “Wall Gantt” Template for a
Single Project
2-week Week 1 Week 2
Team Window
Member Mon Wed Fri Mon Wed Fri
Tom
Dick Out
Harry Out
Jane Out Out
Sally
Mary
High Priority Low Priority
Team member 46
Copyright 2003 -
Med. Priority Out unavailable

24. A “Wall Gantt” Template for a
Mix of Medium / Small Projects
2-week Week 1 Week 2
Team Window
Member Mon Wed Fri Mon Wed Fri
Tom
Dick
Harry
Jane
Sally
Mary
Project 1 Project 3 Small Projects
47
Copyright 2003 -
Project 2 Project 4
Element #3 –
The Project Timeline
“Major Milestones” include all five Events,
plus any customer / company mandated milestones.
24
Actual Time to Completion
20
Scheduled Time to Completion
Cum Duration (weeks)
16
12 Schedule
Variance
8
Actual
Plan
4
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
48
Value Milestone Number Copyright 2009 -

25. Element #4 –
Parking Lot for Issues / Problems
The final quadrant in your project board should provide
space for unplanned issues or problems.
This section should be accessible 24/7 to team members
so they can capture issues as they occur.
Issues that are identified will be dispositioned at the next
team stand-up meeting.
Issue / Problem Owner Date
49
Copyright 2009 -
Example of a Single-Project Visual Board
(aka, “Obeya Light”)
50
Copyright 2009 -

26. Example of a Multi-Project Visual Board
(aka, “Obeya Light”)
Project Cadence Board Multi-Project Wall Gantt
51
Copyright 2009 -
The “Visual Project Board” is a Living
Workflow Management Tool
Management Status Two-Week Action Plan Project Timeline
Planned Actual
Responsible Cost Schedule Tech.
Key Milestone Completion Completion Comments
Team Member Status Status Status
Date Date
Fabricate Prototype David Copperfield 6/7/09 6/7/09 Complete Week 1 Week 2
Prototype Testing Oliver Twist 4/5/09 First Test Failed
Mon Wed Fri Mon Wed Fri
Prototype Validated Tiny Tim 3/14/09 May Require Rework
Tom
Production Tooling Charles Darney 4/24/09 Supplier Issues
Test Plan Complete Sydney Carton 4/20/09 Resources Unavailable
Final Drawing Release Lucy Mannette 5/17/09
Fabricate Qual Units Charles Dickens 6/14/2009
Dick Out
Harry Out
Master Action List Open Issues
Near-Term Action Item
Responsible
Due Date
Completion M / S / C
Comments
Jane Out Out
Team Member Date Priority
Issue / Problem Owner Date
Create prototype parts kit Jane M. 4/27/09 M Parts missing
Draft test plan out for review Joe P. 5/1/09 5/8/09 S Complete
Sally
Complete circuit simulation Cedrick M. 5/1/09 M Need Resources!!
Order injection-mold tooling Joline Q. 5/5/09 M
Meet with key supplier Harry P. 5/10/09 C Mary
Prepare for customer meeting Dave N. 5/10/09 S
52
Copyright 2009 -

27. Project Coordination Using
Team Stand-Up Meetings
How to coordinate a project team –
Application – Coordination
Coordinate team with a 15 minute
“stand-up” meeting
Establishes a work plan for each
team member
All other topics are deferred to Lunch
separate meetings, if needed.
Benefits –
Establishes an urgent “beat” for
project execution
Enables immediate course correction Team
and resource reallocation Schedule
Avoids “time batch” effects caused
by slow feedback 53
Copyright 2009 -
Advantages of Team Coordination
by Stand-up Meetings
Weekly Coordination More Frequent Coordination
100 100
Relative
Relative
Effort
Effort
0 0
5 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
Work Days Before Meeting Work Days Before Meeting
High High
Magnitude of Errors
Magnitude of Errors
and Waste
and Waste
54
Copyright 2009 - Low Time Between Meetings Low Time Between Meetings

28. Powerful Benefits of
Stand-Up Coordination Meetings
Creates a shared language
among team members
Allows for real-time reallocation
of resources
Enables a focus on value-
creating activities
Establishes a clear work plan
for each day
Provides a mechanism for
cultural change
Builds team identity and
emotional commitment
55
Copyright 2009 -
How to Conduct a Stand-up Meeting
1. Should be held either at starting time, or just before
lunch hour.
2. Should last for no more than 1 minute times the number
of attendees (15 minutes MAXIMUM duration at first…
the team can always agree to a longer duration later).
3. Entire team should attend – off-site people can call in on
a speaker phone – overseas people can be connected
through a designated “liaison.”
4. The meeting leader (anyone) should ask three simple
questions:
• What progress have you made since the last meeting?
• How will you work toward your next key milestone?
• What do you need from others to meet this goal?
56
Copyright 2009 -

29. Overcoming Obstacles to Stand-up Meetings
At first, use a kitchen timer to ensure that
your meetings won’t run longer than 15 minutes.
A speaker phone can be used to include
team members that are geographically dispersed.
Keep attendance limited to those team members
who actually create deliverables and perform actions.
Include “extended team” members only when their
activity level on the project is high.
57
Copyright 2009 -
Frequency of Stand-up Meetings
Depends on Project Urgency
Monthly
Sustaining activities – Long-term strategic projects
Weekly
Major projects with low schedule pressure
3 per Week Recommended for
Most Projects!
Typical projects with high schedule pressure
Daily
“Crunch times” within a schedule-critical project
Twice Daily
Emergencies, fire-fighting, last few days prior to launch
58
Copyright 2009 -

30. Time-Slicing Techniques Can Clear
Time for Focused Project Work
Application –
Formal meetings and low-priority
interruptions are deferred to “Project Time”
late morning and PM. for Focused
Project Work
Phone is set to voice mail, and no
e-mail activity.
Several hours in the AM are allocated
for focused project work requiring Lunch
high level of concentration.
Benefits –
Significant increase in value-
creating time per day.
Avoids waste due to turbulence. Daily Work
Schedule
Enables team members to plan
their time and meet schedule
milestones. Copyright 2008 -
Some “Project Time” Implementation
Suggestions
Establish a standard block of time each day that is set aside for
focused project work, say 8:00 – 10:00 AM.
Create a “study area” at your facility that can be reserved by
workers who require short periods of high concentration.
Consider a structured program that allows team members to
work at home during periods in which they are performing
schedule-critical work.
Issue a “project-time guideline” to all employees (see next slide)
Use a “red flag” or other creative method for communicating
when team members are doing high-concentration work.
Use a “door log” to allow visitors to leave notes or ask
questions without interrupting employee’s concentration.
Copyright 2008 -

31. An Example of a
“Project Time” Guideline
Objective
To provide project team members with a dedicated block of time that will
allow them to focus on project specific deliverables without interruption.
When
Monday – Friday from 8:00 -10:00 am (for example)
Guidelines
• Project time will be blocked on Microsoft Outlook calendars.
• No team level meetings are to be scheduled during this time.
• Participants will not be required to attend staff or functional level meetings during this time.
• Time is not intended to catch up on emails.
• Minimal phone interruptions – set phone to voice mail.
• No drop-in interruptions, unless it is an emergency. (see below)
• Closed door or Do Not Disturb flag will indicate a person is busy and should not be interrupted.
• Extended team members will be included at their functional manager’s discretion.
Emergencies
• Critical documents requiring signature
• Questions relating to time-critical production-support issues
• Issues that, if delayed, will cause a delay to a project milestone or the project schedule
Copyright 2008 -
References
Anderson, D. M., 1997, Agile Product Development for Mass Customization, Irwin Professional.
Barnes, T., 1996, Kaizen Strategies for Successful Leadership, Financial Times Publishing.
Bicheno, J., 2004, The New Lean Toolbox , PICSIE Press.
Boothroyd, G., Dewhurst, P., and W. Knight, 1994, Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly,
2nd Edition, Marcel Dekker, Inc.
Bralla, J. G., 1996, Design for Excellence, McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Bralla, J. G., 1999, Design for Manufacturability Handbook, McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Christensen, C. M., 1997, The Innovator’s Dilemma, Harvard Business School Press.
Christensen, C. M. and M. E. Raynor, The Innovator’s Solution, Harvard Business School Press.
Clark, K. B. and S. C. Wheelwright, 1993, Managing New Product and Process Development,
The Free Press.
Cooper, R. G., 1995, When Lean Enterprises Collide, Harvard Business School Press.
Cooper, R. and R. Slagmulder, 1997, Target Costing and Value Engineering, Productivity Press.
Cusumano, M. A. and K. Nobeoka, 1998, Thinking Beyond Lean, The Free Press.
Dimancescu, D., Hines, P., and N. Rich, 1997, The Lean Enterprise, American Management
Association.
Erhorn, C. and J. Stark, 1994, Competing by Design, Oliver Wright Publications, Inc.
Goldratt, E. M., 1997, Critical Chain, North River Press.
Henderson, B. A. and J. L. Larco, 1999, Lean Transformation, The Oaklea Press.
Ichida, T., 1996, Product Design Review, Productivity Press.
Imai, M., 1997, Gemba Kaizen, McGraw Hill, Inc. 62
Copyright 2009 -
Kennedy, M. N., 2003, Product Development for the Lean Enterprise, The Oaklea Press.

32. References (continued)
Laraia, A. C., Moody, P. E. and R. W. Hall, 1999, The Kaizen Blitz, John Wiley & Sons.
Leach, L. P., 2000, Critical Chain Project Management, Artech House.
Liker, J. K., 1998, Becoming Lean, Productivity Press.
Liker, J. K., 2004, The Toyota Way, McGraw-Hill.
Mascitelli, R., 2002, Building a Project-Driven Enterprise: How to Slash Waste and Boost Profits
through Lean Project Management, .
McConnell, S., 1996, Rapid Development, Microsoft Press.
McGrath, M. E., 2004, Next Generation Product Development, McGraw-Hill.
Poppendieck, M., 2003, Lean Software Development, Addison Wesley.
Project Management Institute, 1996, The Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) Guide,
The Project Management Institute.
Reinertsen, D. G., 1997, Managing the Design Factory, The Free Press.
Rother, M. and J. Shook, 1999, Learning to See, The Lean Enterprise Institute.
Smith, P. G. and D. G. Reinertsen, 1998, Developing Products in Half the Time,2nd Edition
Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Suri, R., 1998. Quick Response Manufacturing, Productivity Press.
Tufte, E. R., 1983, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Graphics Press.
Womak, J. P. and D. T. Jones, 1996, Lean Thinking, Simon & Schuster.
63
Copyright 2009 -
Biography of Ron Mascitelli, PMP
Ron Mascitelli, PMP (Project Management Professional, Masters
Degree Solid State Physics, University of California, Los Angeles)
is the Founder and President of Technology Perspectives . Ron is
a recognized leader in the development of advanced product devel-
opment methods. He presents his workshops and seminars
internationally, and has created company-specific lean product
development improvement programs for a number of leading firms,
including Boeing, Intel, Boston Scientific, Adidas, Lockheed-Martin,
Parker Hannifin, Anderson Windows, New Balance Athletic Shoes,
Goodrich Aerospace, Hughes Electronics, and Rockwell Automation.
Ron served as both Senior Scientist and Director of R&D for Hughes Electronics and the
Santa Barbara Research Center. His industry experience includes management of advanced
projects for the Department of Defense, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA), Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, NASA, and the Department of Energy.
Since founding in 1994, Ron Mascitelli has worked with over eighty companies to
improve their product development performance and product-line profitability. In addition, he
has published more than twenty papers and technical articles in major journals and trade
publications, and is a contributing author for IEEE’s Technology Management Handbook. He is
the author of four critically acclaimed books, including the recently published The Lean
Product Development Guidebook. Ron currently lives with his wife and their numerous pets in
Northridge, CA.
64