管理的挑戰——軟技能在專案管理中的應用案例（轉）

加拿大航天裝置開發公司MD Robotics透過關注於軟技能提高了他們的專案管理水平。在這個過程中，他們找到了市場定位並使其產品變得多樣化。

在MD Robotics, 創新意味著巨大的商機。1997年，加拿大太空總署（CSA）委託這家位於安大略省賓頓市的公司交付一項價值1.6億美元的具有特殊效用的靈巧操作器（SPDM），這是國際空間站計劃的重要元件，也是美國宇航局（NASA）領導實施的第三個機器人系統。

SPDM在國際空間站會執行精準的維護和服務工作，如安裝拆卸電池、操作特殊的扳手和套筒扳手、提供載荷的能源和資料連線，這些工作以往都是由一名宇航員透過進行危險的太空行走來完成。此外，最新的科技還可以使機器人“觸控”和“感知”運動。

CSA要求在規定預算和進度下完成產品的技術規範，同時，在最小程度上影響和改變國際空間站的結構和控制軟體。對於MD Robotics來說，這項挑戰有更多積極意義。MD Robotics的副總裁和總經理梅格·伊斯坎達說：“加拿大在諸如太空機器人技術等需要較少預算和精確應用特殊高新技術的市場上一直是非常成功的。對於未來，我們需要尋找新市場並且追求卓越。”

MD Robotics以前曾生產出裝置在美國的太空梭的Canadarm機器人和在2001年4月裝備在國際空間站的第二代Canadarm機器人，SPDM從根本上是一次全新的設計。管理層認定MD Robotics將透過此次獨特的經歷創造出專案管理和工程開發的新方法。最佳實踐會使公司自信地競爭全新的“更快、更好、更便宜”的固定總價專案，這是任何公司開發“前所未有”的技術的開端。

MD Robotics專案總監艾德里安·阿布拉維奇解釋稱：“我們打算徹底改造我們的公司，我們透過此專案在公司內實施變更管理，並改進以往處理流程和工具的方法。”

執行策略

在正式開展工作之前，MD Robotics與CSA談判小組進行了重要的範圍定義與規劃。成本帳目協議包括工作說明、完成工作所需的預算、必要的輸入（內部或客戶提供的裝置）和輸出（交付物）。所有的描述都要符合合同工作說明書，並達到除去管理儲備和風險準備金之外的預算要求。

除了SPDM本身，MD Robotics還必須提供額外的硬體、全面技術支援、操作和軌道執行維護計劃以及飛行支援裝置。這些工作在運作中的合同之外，但在戰略上是非常重要的。

MD Robotics政府專案的副總裁克里斯·伍德蘭認為：“在我們看來，運作專案的唯一手段時採用專案管理流程。從戰略角度看來，信譽非常重要。為了維護自己的信譽，我們必須交付產品。專案管理是我們實現承諾的核心。”

MD Robotics已經擁有一套高度專案化的組織，他們已有的專案管理控制體系涵蓋了必需的專案管理“硬技能”。

阿布拉莫維奇說：“我們已經開展了掙值管理，專案管理辦公室成為一項必要組織，它已經深入到專案中。我們必須做出改變的事情大部分是軟技能：團隊建設、與供應商的互動與管理、對人員進行授權，還有確認資訊使用的一致性。”

阿布拉莫維奇還認為，一旦團隊意識到責任和義務，他們就會毋庸置疑地進行流程創新。

管理方式

為了鼓勵自由溝通和促進問題解決，管理層採用了集中座位的方法：包括管理團隊在內的所有專案團隊搬到了MD Robotics大樓的同一層樓中。藉助於開放、公開的環境，專案經理可以方便地與能夠得到領導授權的工程師進行交流。

阿布拉莫維奇介紹說，由於團隊每天的交流和大量的特別會議，每週的小團隊會議和每月的大團隊會議顯得不那麼必要。“作為替代，我們設立了‘沒有意外’的方針，這意味著團隊成員必須迅速地與包括管理層和其他受影響團隊在內的相關各方溝通任何問題。”阿布拉莫維奇說。

在“沒有意外”的方針下，團隊被賦予了相當多的自主權。管理層會接到開發人員的通知，但並不用必須簽署。資料庫管理員、額外的文員和大量的實習生將工程師從繁瑣的工作中解脫出來，使他們抽出更多的時間關注於他們主要的職責。

同級評審有助於解決問題。例如，系統工程技術評審（SETR）允許工程師們針對技術問題和方案進行爭論。阿布拉莫維奇說：“SETR承擔了早期評審平臺的功能，它確保某位工程師不會花時間調查和開發那些絕對不會被著手進行設計的設想或者問題解決方案。”

SETR同時促進了管理層對於工程活動的快速接受。阿布拉莫維奇說，管理層代表會參加SETR，但不會朝著“合乎計劃”方案的方向操縱決定，而且在大多數情況下，他們會當場對SETR的決定做出管理層的批准。他說：“在18個月內，沒有任何一宗SETR的決定被管理層推翻。”

時間決定一切

NASA計劃在2004年裝置機器人，很明顯，MD Robotics不能錯過他們承諾的交付日期。在SPDM的工作說明書裡，進度表詳述了主要的里程碑和交付物。

MD Robotics基於過去的專案使用自下而上的方法估計出成本。兩個外部的團隊評審並驗證了成本數字。考慮到專案風險，2360萬美元被留作儲備。

掙值里程碑有其自身的進度日期和相應的預算。隨著專案進展，專案經理每月會評審里程碑，將其與計劃日期比較，並得出完成它們的實際花費。

MD Robotics專案計劃和控制經理道格·高安斯說：“如果你控制住進度，那你總是會控制住費用。非常關鍵的一個問題是：要有一份整合的進度表將包括交付物和里程碑在內的所有專案元素整合到一起。”

總體計劃將從客戶付款到里程碑的所有專案元素整合為一份固定總價合同。高安斯說：“我們沒有選擇，這是使客戶確信‘只有付錢，才會有進展’的唯一方法。但你一定要選擇那些可實現的進展。”

這種機制帶來了管理上的挑戰，特別是當積極地管理關鍵路徑時更是如此。阿布拉莫維奇說：“一方面，付款里程碑較有優勢，因為它們使我們持續地關注於交付物，並且使客戶看到已有的進展，但是如果有太多的里程碑彼此靠得太近，靈活性就會大打折扣。由於里程碑被鎖定於付款的前提下，所以你無法使用滾動計劃法。”

在專案的生命週期內，透過整合客戶強制的和批准的範圍變更建議，他們會修正原始的費用和進度計劃，同時修改相應的專案費用和接受評審日期。

進度報告

SPDM的產品設計工作與工程工作並行展開。工程團隊與管理層詳細審查了所有的客戶變更請求，這樣做是為了確保目前的設計會滿足這些新需求並確認它們是否已經包括在最初的範圍內。工程團隊會迅速地與客戶討論範圍外的變更，如果客戶批准了變更的實施，工程團隊就會分析這些變更對各方面的影響，如技術、成本、進度、人力、裝置和風險等。

由於太空機器人必須在太空中停留至少10年，所以質量和安全上有強制的要求。作為最初專案計劃中定義的一部分，MD Robotics團隊建立了一套完整的產品保證計劃，涵蓋了諸多方面，如材料與流程選擇、電氣及機械零件選擇、配置管理、安全性與可靠性保證，還有軟體產品保證等。

產品保證人員把座位與專案團隊安排在一起，並且變為設計、生產和測試團隊的一個組成部分。阿布拉莫維奇說：“他們帶來了許多太空相關的寶貴經驗。

控制風險

MD Robotics同時著手於對風險管理進行特別地思考。透過持續地重複檢查關鍵路徑，專案團隊想出了減輕成本和進度風險的創新方法。

阿布拉莫維奇說：“在這個專案裡，我們的風險管理與關鍵路徑是同步的。由於它會影響成本和進度，所以這樣做很有必要。我們同時關注機會，這在從前從來沒有被看作風險管理的一部分。通常，人們會清楚地理解其中的明顯聯絡，但是大多數情況下，他們沒有探討這種可能性。現在，我們嚴格地遵循了這種做法。”

創新的機會大量存在。阿布拉莫維奇說：“NASA管理下的國際空間站計劃經歷了痛苦的變更過程，這是由於它內在地複雜性和重大的預算問題，這迫使幾乎所有的後續設計進行變更和介面重新調整。這些變更影響了所有的事情，從SPDM介面到機器人在太空的執行方式。”

系統工程團隊集中精力尋找一種方法將進化的SPDM與不斷變化的國際空間站架構整合在一起，同時還要將對產品的影響降到最低。其結果不言而喻：極少的範圍外變更出現在專案生命週期內。

高安斯說：“在專案開始時，需求被充分地深思熟慮過。由於不存在模糊的需求，這使得做出成本和進度上可行的計劃變得容易。在固定成本的工作中，明確需求是關鍵所在。”

主要的風險起因於設計中引入了未經測試的新工具，帶來了機械和電氣封裝的純粹的幾何複雜性。MD Robotics的設計工程師和質量保證人員在長期的關鍵時期一直待在現場。

專案分包

由於分包出去的部分佔據合同總價的50％，所以為了達到共贏，供應商很早就與工程師合作並介入了設計過程。

早在SPDM建議階段，預算就被分配到每份分包合同上。這些資訊透過先前的專案經驗、配額和採購歷史記錄被驗證是行之有效的。阿布拉莫維奇說：“潛在供應商在此時被識別出來，來源單一的元件被標識為專案風險。”

MD Robotics儘可能與供應商簽訂固定總價合同協議。然而，為了使工作更有靈活性，SPDM工程師們建議MD Robotics在與一家供應商艱苦談判的同時自行開發設計符合空間標準的照相機。MD Robotics同意了此建議並批准新專案上馬。這種照相機後來變成他們自己一項成功的商業機遇，公司獲得了超過1300萬美元的合同。

為了保證在整個合同中的工程與質量高標準，每家供應商配備了一個專門的分包商管理團隊。對於規模較小的供應商，一個團隊會負責多個分包商。

收穫成果

專案團隊於2001年11月14日和15日完成了與CSA的接受評審，僅有像微小的軟體修復這類少數的遺留任務需要完成。然而，機械臂接合部位深處的一塊價值50美元的不合格塑膠元件迫使MD Robotics在所有的21處接合部位更換了此元件並重做了部分測試。阿布拉莫維奇說：“所有專案經理都會遭遇‘墨菲定律’，我們也不例外。”

總的來說，MD Robotics達成了進度和成本計劃，而且客戶也比較滿意。目前，正在進行機器人端到端測試也確保其軟體接合並整合到國際空間站系統中。伍德蘭說：“我認為此專案的交付使用賦予了我們一種競爭優勢，我們現在可以以完全不同的方式競標。把這個專案完成並做好很重要，它為我們積極競爭類似專案建立信心，並使我們知道我們能夠完成自己的承諾。”

今天，公司繼續從他們的自身認識中收穫成果。阿布拉莫維奇說：“在公司大多數的新專案中，專案副經理已經被提升到總監職位。我們現在在領導實施新專案，並且使用我們的軟技能和經驗教訓，這的確有很大幫助。我們開始接手小型的快速專案。我們的專案組合迅猛增長，這主要歸功於我們充分展現了‘我們能夠做到’。”（完）

附文：

小行動，大收穫

●SPDM團隊被組織成小型的子專案團隊，這些小團隊的座位被安排在一個沒有隔斷的開放辦公環境裡。團隊成員間傳達著這樣的資訊：各團隊的地位平等；管理者平易近人；專案成功依賴於開放而迅速的溝通。儲物櫃被集中起來並蓋上桌板以充當臨時畫圖討論區。會議室環繞辦公區修建。

●員工參與到專案基線集思廣益討論、工程問題方案和變更管理的提出、評稽核風險方案中。由於管理層避免“干擾”、猜測和自上而下的決定，團隊相應地增強了所有權和責任感。

●專案和團隊績效評估還有獎金和加薪與專案總體目標和績效相關。管理層透過以下方式表彰員工成就：獎勵和認可、允許員工而不是經理領導客戶演示、VIP人員訪問和電視採訪等。

領導藝術

一份固定總價合同團結了專案團隊。以下的專案管理實踐將團隊合作變為現實：

專案計劃與專案基線。在建立基線或專案中任何的自下而上估計時，獨裁都不允許出現。變更只有在被諮詢過提出者的意見之後才會被付諸實施。

專案管理控制系統。關鍵路徑不僅在問題發生時才起作用。管理層使用“思考會”的形式來做假定情況分析。專案團隊嘗試新方法來驗證它們如何影響成本和進度。

強調人員聯絡。包括經理、客戶和員工在內的專案團隊緊密接觸。當公司裡很多人墨守陳規時，團隊聚集起來，集中意見，並一起證明其行之有效。

風險管理技術。專案團隊對風險的持續關注促使成員在包括同步工程在內的各方面工作進行創新。設計團隊邀請主要的供應商作為平等的夥伴參與到工作中。

原文：
Mission Control
By Ross Foti

By focusing on soft skills, this Canadian aerospace development firm improved its project management practices. In the process, the company refined its niche and diversified its portfolio.

At MD Robotics, innovation means big business. In 1997, the Brampton, Ontario, Canada-based firm was commissioned by Canadian Space Agency (CSA) to deliver a $160 million special-purpose dexterous manipulator (SPDM), a critical component of the International Space Station program and the third robotic system contributed to the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)-led effort.

The SPDM performs delicate maintenance and servicing jobs on the International Spec Station, such as installing and removing batteries, operation specialized wrenches and socket extensions, and providing power and data connectivity to payloads – tasks that otherwise would require an astronaut to perform dangerous space walks. What’s more, the latest technology allows the robot to “touch” and “feel” movements.

CSA needed a product that met technical specifications, within budget and schedule, while minimizing the impact and changes to the International Space Station architecture or control software. But for MD Robotics, the challenge was more meaningful. “Canada has been very successful with a small budget, very smartly applied to specific high-tech niches like space robotics,” says Mag Iskander, vice president and general manager, MD Robotics. “As for our future, we need to look for new niches and excel in them.”

In past efforts, the aerospace company produced the Canadarm robot (on the U.S. Space Shuttle) and the Canadarm 2 (launched April 2001 on the International Space Station), but the SPDM is a radically new one-off design. Management decided the unique effort would allow MD Robotics to create a new approach to project management and engineering development. Best practices would enable the company to move with confidence into bidding new “faster, better, cheaper” projects with a firm, fixed price – a first for any company developing “never-before” technology.

“We attempted to reinvent ourselves as a company,” says Adrian Abramovici, director of programs, MD Robotics. “We used this project to implement change management in our organization – and improve the way we traditionally approached processes and tools.”

Executive Suite

Before “official” work even began, the MD Robotics and CSA negotiating teams performed a significant part of the scope definition and planning. Cost account agreements included work description, budget to accomplish the work, necessary inputs (internal- or customer-furnished equipment) and outputs (deliverables). All of the descriptions corresponded to the work effort defined in the contractual statement of work (SOW) and its budget, excluding the management reserve and risk allowance.

In addition to the SPDM itself, MD Robotics had to provide spare hardware, as well as overall engineering support work, operational and in-orbit maintenance planning, combined robotics operations and flight support equipment. Aside from the contract in hand, the effort was strategically important.

“In our view, the only way to run a project is to use project management processes,” says Chris Woodland, MD Robotics vice president, government projects. “From a strategic point of view, credibility is important. In order to be credible, you have to deliver. Project management is the heart of how we deliver on our commitments.”

MD Robotics already was a highly “projectized” organization – its established program management control system covered the required “hard” project management skills. “We already performed earned value management, and the project management office was a given – it was all already built in,” Abramovici says. “A lot of the things we had to change were related mostly to the soft skills: team building, interaction with suppliers and management, empowering our people and making sure the message is consistently applied.” Abramovici says one the team felt ownership and accountability, process innovation was sure to follow.

Full Responsibility

To encourage free communication and problem-solving, the executive team hit upon the idea of co-location”: All project staff, including management, were transferred to one floor of MD Robotics facility. Due to an open, communal setup, project managers were free to interact with engineers who could approach leaders for sign-off.

Due to the daily interaction and numerous ad-hoc meetings of the co-location tam, Abramovici says weekly subteam and monthly primary team meetings weren’t as necessary. “Instead, we instituted a policy of ‘no surprises,’ meaning that all team members immediately communicated any and all information to all parties interested, both in management and in the other potentially affected teams,” Abramovici says.

The teams were given considerable autonomy under the “no surprises” rule. Management was informed of developments, but sign-off was not require. Database technicians, additional secretaries and numerous engineering students relieved engineers of mundane tasks, allowing them more time to concentrate on their primary responsibilities.

Peer reviews helped resolve issues. For example, the systems engineering technical review (SETR) allowed engineers to debate technical problems and solutions. “By acting as an early review forum, the SETR helped ensure that individual engineers did not spend time investigating or developing ideas for changes or solutions to problems that ultimately would not make it into the design,” Abramovici says.

The SETR also facilitated quick management buy-in for engineering activities. Abramovici says management representatives attended the SETRs without attempting to steer decisions toward “programmatically palatable3” solutions, and in most cases granted management approval for the SETR decisions on the spot. “In 18 months, not a single SETR decision was reversed by the management team,” he says.

Timing is Everything

NASA planned to launch the robot in 2004, and it was clear MD Robotics could not miss its promised delivery. The schedule, defined in the SPDM SOW, detailed the major milestones and deliverables.

Based on past projects, MD Robotics used bottom-up estimates to arrive at costs. Two external groups reviewed and validated the numbers. Considering the risk associated with the project, $23.6 million was set aside.

Earned value milestones had scheduled dates and associated budgets. As the program progressed, project managers reviewed the milestones monthly, comparing them to their planned dates and the actual costs of achieving them.

“If you hold the schedule, you will invariably hold the cost,” says Doug Gowans, manager of program planning and control, MD Robotics. “Having an integrated schedule that pulls together all the elements of the program – deliverables and milestones – was absolutely key.”

The overall plan tied customer payment to milestones, as firm, fixed-price contracts require. “I don’t think we had a choice,” Gowans says. “That’s the only way the customer is assured that, when the dollars are paid, progress is made. But you must pick increments that are achievable.”

The setup provides management challenges, especially when managing the critical path proactively, Abramovici says. “On one hand, payment milestones are good because they allow a continuous focus on those deliverables and permit the customer to see progress being made,” Abramovici says. “But if there are too many milestones too closely spaced, it takes away flexibility as the program progresses. You can’t use a rolling-wave approach because the milestones are locked down based on payment.”

The original (baseline) cost and schedule was amended through the life of the project by incorporating customer-mandated and approved changes of scope proposals, which consequently modified the project cost and acceptance review date.

Progress Report

Engineering work paralleled the SPDM product design effort. The engineering team and management scrutinized any changes requested by the customer to ensure the existing design would meet the new demands and to define whether or not the new requirements were within the original scope. The team immediately discussed out-of-scope changes with the customer and, if the customer approved implementation, the team analyzed these requests to identify technical, cost, schedule, human resources, facilities and risk impacts.

Because space robotic systems must endure at least 10 years in space, quality, reliability and safety demands are imperative. As part of the initial project plan definition, the MD Robotics team established a complete product assurance plan that covered materials and processes selection (critical for space applications), configuration management, electrical and mechanical parts selection, safety and reliability, and software product assurance.

Product assurance personnel were co-located with the project team and became an integral part of the design, manufacturing and test teams. “They brought extensive space-related experience to the table,” Abramovici says.

The Glass is Half Full

The MD Robotics team also began thinking differently about risk management. By continuously re-examining the critical path, the project team brainstormed innovative ways to mitigate threats to cost and schedule.

“Our risk management on this project was synchronized with the critical path,” Abramovici says. “Because it affects your cost and schedule, this make sense. We also looked at opportunities, which no one ever looked at before as part of risk management. While people intellectually understand that there’s a positive connotation, in many cases, they don’t explore those possibilities. We followed this approach religiously.”

There were plenty of opportunities for innovation. “The International Space Station program, managed by NASA, was going through painful changes due to its inherent complexity as well as significant budget problems that forced almost continuous design changes and interface realignments,” Abramovici says. “The changes affected everything, from SPDM interfaces to the way to robot was to be used in space.”

The system engineering team focused on finding ways to integrate to evolving SPDM into the changing Internal Space Station architecture while minimizing the impact on the product. The results speak for themselves: Very few out-of-scope changes appeared through the life of the project.

“The requirements were extremely well thought out at the beginning,” Gowans says. “There were no soft requirements, and that made it easier to put a plan in place that was achievable both cost- and schedule-wise. Nailing down those requirements is key in a fixed-price job.”

Major internal risks arose from the introduction of new, untested technologies into the design, by the sheer geometrical complexity of the mechanical and electrical packaging. MD Robotics design engineers and quality-assurance personnel were onsite for extended critical time periods.

Add Subcontracts, Stir

Because subcontracted items accounted for 50 percent of the total contract value, suppliers were brought early into the design process and cooperated with engineers to mutual benefit, Abramovici says.

During the SPDM proposal stage, budgets were allocated to each subcontract. The information was validated through previous program experience, quotations and past procurement history. “At this time, potential vendors were identified, and sole-source components were flagged as program risks,” Abramovici says.

Whenever possible, MR Robotics entered into fixed-price agreements with suppliers. However, in one case of ingenuity at work, SPDM engineers suggested MR Robotics develop its own space-qualified camera design in parallel with a struggling supplier. MD Robotics management agreed, and a new project was launched. The cameras turned into a good business opportunity on their own, as the firm won major contracts for more than $13 million.

To ensure the highest engineering and quality standards were maintained throughout the contract, a dedicated subcontracts management team was assigned to each vendor. With smaller vendors, a team was responsible for more than one subcontract.

The Upshot

The project team completed its acceptance review with CSA on 14 and 15 November 2001, with only a minimal number of remaining actions to close, such as minor software fixes. However, a $ 50 plastic part deep in the arm joint failed, forcing MD Robotics to replace the part in all 21 joints and perform a partial re-test. “No project manager goes by without meeting ‘Mr. Murphy,’ and we did too,” Abramovici says.

All in all, MD Robotics met the schedule and budget, and the customer was satisfied. Currently, the robot is undergoing end-to-end testing to ensure that it will interface with software and integrate with International Space Station systems. “I think delivery of this project has given us an edge over other companies – we’re able to bid contracts in different light,” Woodland says. “It was very important to do this project and do it well. It had given us confidence in being able to bid on similar projects more aggressively and knowing that we can accomplish what we set out to do.”

Today, the firm continues to reap rewards from its introspection. “In most of our new projects, the associate program managers have been prompted to director positions with our company,” Abramovici says. “We’re now leading new programs, and we’re applying our soft skills lessons learned. It has made a big difference. We moved into small, fast and quick programs. Our portfolio has dramatically increased and, mostly, that’s because we’ve shown we can do it.”


Small Decisions, Big Rewards

Soft skills-driven management choices enabled the project to stay on track:

l The SPDM was grouped into smaller subproject teams, and these smaller teams were co-located in an open, wall-less office environment. Staff got the message that the team was equal, management was accessible and that project success relied on open and immediate communications. Storage cabinets grouped and capped with tabletop surfaces acted as impromptu drawing review areas. Meeting rooms were built surrounding the team area.

l Employees were involved from the project baseline brainstorming, engineering problem resolution and change management through initiation, review and risk resolution. Because management avoided “interfering,” second-guessing or top-down decisions, the team responded with increased owner ship and responsibility.

l Project and team performance appraisals – and the resulting bonuses and raises – were linked to the overall program goals as well as performance. Management promoted achievements through awards and recognition and by allowing employees, rather that managers, to lead customer presentations, VIP visits or television interviews.

The Art of Management

A firm, fixed-price budget focused the project team. The following project management practices made this teamwork possible:

Project Plan and Project Baseline. No arbitrary cuts were made in any of the bottom-up estimates during the establishment of the baseline or at any other time during the project. Modifications were made only after consulting with the originators.

Program Management Control System. The critical path was “worked” continuously, not just when problems emerged. The management team used “think” sessions to explore “what-if” scenarios. The group tried new approaches to see how they would affect cost and schedule.

Human relations Emphasis. The team, including managers, the customer and the project employees, was extremely cohesive. While many people in the organization were doing things “the old way,” the team felt it had something to prove, leading it to pull together and focus even more.

Risk management Techniques. The team’s continuing awareness of risk drove staff to innovate in all aspects of the work, including concurrent engineering. Major suppliers were brought into the design teams as equal partners.
[@more@]