К оглавлению
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 
51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 
68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 
85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 
102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 
119 120 121 122 123 

Establish appropriate meetings and reviews to monitor all aspects of your

project. Table 4-4 shows the most common meetings and reviews usually established

for a project.

Because of the variability of projects, the content of these meetings and reviews

must be your own.

These interchanges must be conducted at frequent intervals. The lower the

position in the hierarchy, the more frequent the interchange. In other words,

Schedule Reviews should be held more often than Customer Reviews.

Just because the SOW is being properly monitored does not necessarily mean

the program is running properly; it only means that it is being monitored properly.

The point is that if the program is not being monitored properly, you will

not know it until it is too late.

The reviews must have metrics established to indicate if each event is in

T a b l e 4 - 4 — M e e t i n g s a n d R e v i e w s

Review or Meeting Cause Description Appearance

Schedule Reviews 1f, 5e, 6d

Budget Reviews 1f, 5e

Design Reviews 11a, 51e, 52a, 53

Technical Interchange Meetings 1f, 5d, 5e, 6d

Subcontractor Meetings 5d, 5e

In-Process Reviews 5d

Customer Meetings 5d, 5e

tolerance or out-of-tolerance. The content of each of the reviews must be appropriate

for that review.

1f (NO) The SOW is not being performed properly.

The SOW is not being properly performed when any review shows that performance

is out-of-tolerance in such elements as:





First, schedule the necessary meetings. Since you are having problems, the

meetings should be more frequent than normal at first. The frequency can be

decreased as the program progresses.

Second, review the measurements and metrics and determine which are outof-

tolerance and which are in tolerance. For those that are out-of-tolerance, you

need to make a tactical decision as to how to handle each one. Some may be

allowed to run normally and, with increased scrutiny, will in time be brought

back into tolerance. For instance, there may be times when an event is behind

schedule today or this week but will be back on schedule by next month. That

is frequently a problem with the plan. If this is the case, let it run and return to

schedule later. Don’t fool yourself, however. Ensure that the event will be back

in tolerance shortly. Make a note of the situation so the plan can be changed

for the next project. Others may require a Tiger Team (a group formed to

resolve this specific issue) to bring them back into tolerance. You must make

that judgment on-site.

Third, when all the measurements and metrics are back in tolerance, monitor

all events closely and regularly. Because elements of the project have been outof-

tolerance and, as a consequence, additional effort has been expended, it may

be advisable to replan the project. If this is necessary, refer to the ‘‘Recovery’’

section presented in Cause Description 2d.


2a (NO) The Specification was not properly defined.

If you do not thoroughly understand the Specification, it is not properly

defined. Granted, the problem may be your fault but, if you don’t understand

it, it makes no difference. You must understand the Specification before proceeding

further. A Specification that is not properly defined is one that is either

not understandable or not testable.

It is the responsibility of the requirements definition (negotiating) team to

ensure that these conditions are satisfied. One of the best ways to ensure this is

to require that the technical manager be on the requirements definition (negotiating)

team. The technical manager will ensure that there is full understanding

and that the result is testable or will suffer the consequences.