60 likes | 74 Views
Learn about benchmarking and how to establish performance indicators for business effectiveness with a focus on Configuration Management (CM) practices. Explore the challenges and resolutions using the 3-Ball Model process for CM. Dive into the key contributors affecting CM performance comparisons and discover practical solutions to standardize performance indicators.
E N D
Establish Uniform Benchmarking Presented By: Vince Gilbert 8th Configuration Management Benchmarking Conference October 29 – 31, 2001 Raleigh, NC
Problem Statement Benchmarking is a process of sharing and gaining information (comparing). From that information you can create performance indicators for your site business effectiveness. There is no standard set of CM performance indicators to allow relative comparisons.
Key Contributors • Culture differences • Relative importance • Lack of understanding of CM • Core process model versus 3-ball model • CM not regulatory requirement • CM is the other “guys” problem
3-Ball Model Resolution Process OTHER PROCES S Change Problem with CM Design Requirements Decide on Path Change Design Requirements Work Instructions Change Physical Plant Material Requests Change Facility Configuration Information Current CFI Do nothing more
Solution • Revise INPO AP-929 to reflect 3-ball resolution, referencing ANSI CM-1-2000. • Revise NEI SNPM cost definition for CC001 to include resolution of 3 ball CM issues. • Select a few PIs for CC001, CC002, and CC003. • Endorse ANSI Standard CM-1-2000. • Steering committee charter a performance indicator working group.
PI Examples Develop leading and lagging performance indicators. Ex: ØOperator errors due to document errors ØEngineer input requests ØDocumentchange backlog (priority based) ØEngineering change closeout ØWork package use of documents with open changes ØEquipment data changes open ØEngineering changes in preparation ØEngineering changes in implementation