Agile Software Development and Earned Value Management – A Match Made in Heaven

Why do so many large programs overspend and overrun?

The projects are managed as if they were merely complicated ? when in fact, they were complex. They are planned as if everything is known or knowable at the start ? when in fact, they involve high levels of reducible (Epistemic) and irreducible (Aleatory) uncertainty and resulting risk. Combining Systems Engineering and Project Management is a critical success factor in reducing these uncertainties, resulting in increased probability of program success.

Starting With End In Mind

Here are the data and processes needed to increase the probability of program success

Programs and Projects are Systems unto themselves. The outcomes of the project – the delivered Capabilities needed to accomplish the Mission or fulfill a Strategy, are systems as well.

The key to the success of the integration of Systems Engineering Management and Program Performance Management is to have Units of Measure that form the basis of the collective outcomes between Systems Engineering and Project Performance Management.

The failure of integration efforts starts with the failure to establish common and shared units of measure for the performance of all system elements and their products or services

The three primary phases of any successful project must answer the questions posed in these phases, which range from linear to iterative and incremental. But each item in each classification of the phase needs answers in units of measure meaningful to the decision-makers.

Systems Thinking is a discipline for seeing the whole. It is a framework for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for seeing patterns rather than static ‘snapshots.’ Systems Thinking is a discipline for seeing the ‘structure’ that underlies complex situations.?

• Systems Thinking helps ask the questions.
• Systems Engineering helps find the solutions.
• Project Management helps manage the work efforts needed to produce the solution for the needed budget at the needed time, with the needed Capabilities.
• To comprehend and manage the project and develop a solution, we need to have an understanding and agreement on the solutions’ boundaries.

Transformation to the Context of Systems Engineering and Program Performance Management

When Systems Engineering and Project Performance Management are isolated, silos are created and arranged in a hierarchy of people, processes, and tools.

The notion of an Integrated Project Performance Management System (IPPMS) means all the moving parts are seamlessly connected through processes and their data.

The seamlessness starts with an architecture of the connections from the outside in, the same a building architecture does.

The basis for integrating SE and PPM starts and ends with Architecture. Programmatic Architecture is the basis of this integration.

Roles of Program Performance Management and Systems Engineering

The traditional roles and responsibilities of project managers and systems engineers remain the same in the integrated system. What is shared is the execution of the processes of the Integrated Project Performance Management System. It is the process that provides the benefit to the project, with individuals contributing to the shared processes.

System Engineers define the technical architecture of the solution. Project Managers define the Programmatic architecture of the solution. Combining the programmatic and technical architectures is the role of the Integrated Project Performance Management System (IPPMS).

One cannot be successful without the other. Both interact to increase the probability of success for the solution.?

Integrating the Two Perspectives Needed to Increase the Probability of Success

There are four core approaches for integrating Systems Engineering and Project Management and the Project Performance Management processes.

1. Use standards for both Systems Engineering and Project Management. Select the standards best suited for the domain. Train both domains to assure alignment.
2. Write a formal description of the integration processes and the data they produce. Make these descriptions visual.
3. Continuous assess the effectiveness of the integration and take corrective or preventive actions to maintain the effectiveness and performance of the integration.
4. The integration of SE and PPM is based on the integration of the responsibilities and accountabilities for the success of the integration.

The World of Engineered Systems

In the broad community, the term system “system,” may mean a collection of technical, natural, or social elements, or a combination of all three.?

This may produce ambiguities at times: for example, does “management” refer to the management of the SE process or management of the system being engineered??

As with many special disciplines, SE uses terms in ways that may be unfamiliar outside the discipline.?

For example, in systems, science, and therefore in SE, “open” means that a system is able to interact with its environment--as opposed to being "closed” to its environment.?

But in the broader engineering world, we would read “open” to mean “non-proprietary” or “publicly agreed upon.” In such cases, the SEBoK tries to avoid misinterpretation by elaborating the alternatives, e.g., “system management” or “systems engineering management”.

The Motivation for Integrating Systems Engineering and Program Performance Management starts with 4 Known Root Causes of Program Failure

There is extensive research on the Root Causes of project and program failures. I’ve participated in several of these. This summary of four key causes was developed at the Performance Assessment and Root Cause Analyses (PARCA) organization of the US DoD. You’ll see each of these starts with some form of uncertainty, that creates a risk to the success of the project in its domain – performance, cost, schedule, risk itself, and technical issues.

Systems Engineering is a Closed-Loop Control System

This closed loop system integrates Customer/User needs, objectives, and requirements in terms of capabilities, measures of effectiveness, environments, and constraints to initiate the process. Each increment of capability is provided with its own set of attributes and associated performance values.?

Measures of Effectiveness quantify the results to be obtained and may be expressed as probabilities that the system will perform as required.

For example, the chance that an event will be recognized with a certain probability and that the probability of a false alarm is below a certain percentage.

Environments are the natural operating and threat environments, space, airborne, and ground segments. Internal environments, e.g., whether a particular system solution requires air conditioning or cryogenic cooling, are for the Systems Engineer to specify; it is of no consequence for the customer if the solution falls within the overall constraints and requirements.

Customer-imposed constraints can take the form of interoperability with existing or other planned systems, operations, and maintenance personnel skill level requirements, and costs and schedules.

Start with the Goal in Mind

The objective of Systems Engineering is to assure the system is designed, built, and operated to accomplish its purpose in the most cost-effective way possible, considering performance, cost, schedule, and risk.?

A system is a collection of different elements that together produce results not obtainable by the elements alone.?