Obstacle of the day: Scope Creep 5

[MadMango]

Scope Creep can be a huge issue in any industry, and I'm surprised that it has not been discussed in greater detail here. It seems that even though there are Preliminary Design Views, Design Reviews, Final Design Reviews, Prototype Builds, and Pre-production Builds, certain branches in an organization will keep their traps shut until the Eleventh Hour. I've been working on a modular product family for the better part of 18 months now. The last 6 have been mostly approving castings, and dotting I's and crossing T's. Suddenly, those wonderful folks in Marketing want to add certain Bells and change certain Whistles. Short of ramming someone's head (not mine) through a reinforced wall, how have members here dealt with last minute changes in their environments?

I understand that adding or changing part finishes is no big deal, but how can a product expect to make it to market on time when requested changes involve 4-6wks in mold retooling alone? We'll overlook associated re-testing and validation for now. It seems incredulous to desire changes without pushes the schedule as well.

Grrr...

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of these Forums?

 

[SLTA]

When my scope creeps, so does my price. It's a bit different when your own company is causing the creep.

 

[TGS4]

MadMango - so long as you detail (in excruciating detail) the consequences of the other party's - then it is what it is.

If marketing wants to make a change - fine. Here;s what it will cost in terms of money and schedule. If they want it for free - foxtrot oscar.

 

[MintJulep]

For an external customer the answer is easy. "I'd be glad to quote you a change order for that request. I'll highlight the associated schedule delay as well."

That often makes such requests go away.

For an entirely internal situation such as you appear to have the approach is similar.

You go to the boss and explain the new requirements that marketing has given, the tasks already completed that must be repeated and schedule delay associated with the new requirements.

Then let the issue get resolved at the appropriate pay grade.

Of course if marketing is "the boss", this approach will fail.

 

[CastMetal]

I am currently dealing with a group who is fond of major changes at the last minute, or later. This always adds some stress in the form of incessant phone calls wondering why the project is late, callers always seemingly oblivious to the major changes made. This used to be more frustrating until I was given a better idea of the market they compete in, Offering rapid customization of newly/near release products is how they secure most of their contracts. Adding that extra bell or whistle and still having it shipped in two months puts them a step ahead of the competition.

This approach may catch up to them someday as it does seem to cause major organizational dysfunctions. Recently going REV A-E in a month with all of the revs in some stage of production caused some headaches. And I still don't enjoy receiving an ECN (engineering change notification) the day before production is to begin. One just has to acknowledge the major boost this approach can give sales, and a decent increase in prices for dealing with the inconvenience never hurts.

Comprehension is not understanding. Understanding is not wisdom. And it is wisdom that gives us the ability to apply what we know, to our real world situations

 

[SomptingGuy]

In engineering software, we call it "feature creep". That's when a marketing person demands that we make an existing, well designed product do something it wasn't designed to do ... because it can't be that difficult and the basic infrastructure is kinda there already. "How long would it take you to ...?"

"Well,I could hack up something that will tide you over for a while and do what you've requested, but it'll not be a lasting solution or one we can build on."

"How long will it take?"

- Steve

 

[MadMango]

The Golden Triangle (cost, time, quality: pick two) was hammered into my head a long, long time ago and I find that it still holds true today.

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of these Forums?

 

[GregLocock]

I used to work for a company that made most of its money from scope creep (in my opinion). I strongly suspect they spent many meetings with the customer pointing out the advanatages of various upgrades that were out of scope.

However for those of us who don't have the government as a customer, I think the best approach is to work with marketing throughout the program, and to separate the systems that you really don't want to have to change late in the program, from those where some last minute variation is at least not a complete tearup.

If your project lead time is two years and your competitor comes out with a better solution one year ahead of your launch, stamping your foot and saying that the product cannot be changed is a quick route to irrelevance. Not many people have crystal balls that function perfectly.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[patprimmer]

Marketing will always want every possible option as that increases their potential market and gives a perceived advantage over their opposition in some cases.

They can quickly assess the pros and cons of that once the extra cost and delay is spelled out in monosyllables.

Like how many can I sell if they are all custom colour. Maybe twice as many. How many can I sell if the price increases to 30% over the pretty well equal opposition except for wide choice of colour. Maybe two tenths of next to none.

Or how many will the opposition sell before we hit the market.

You need to explain it in a non emotional statement of fact so they get it without a pi$$ing contest being started. If the mood and opportunity presents itself with no risk of leading to a pi$$ing contest, it may be possible to explain that if the desire for the features was stated at preliminary design stage, the changes might have been possible with little to no delay or cost.

Be prepared for a rebuff along the lines of "well we had no idea that you had not incorporated these features". Then be prepared to improve communications so they truly understand what you are proposing at the earliest stage.



Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376 for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm

for site rules

 

[tygerdawg]

In a logical world scope creep could be controlled, but we all know we work in a dysfunctional corporate environment where Reality & Logic have been viewed as distractions and inconveniences, to be replaced by Sales & Marketing. I believe, with all my heart, that it is getting exponentially worse by the day.

I had an episode where I saw it coming months ahead. Got agreement against a performance requirement, in writing, witnesses, agreed to in strategy meeting. At the last minute, in a team meeting, the Marketeer blew a gasket and screamed at me [blue]I don't care WHAT we agreed to six months ago, we HAVE TO DO THIS NOW![/blue] Weak, spineless manager did not back me up. So, had to re-group and jump through crazy hoops to deliver. In the end, I was branded as "uncooperative" and not a team player, then also slammed in review for not meeting deadlines caused by the last minute changes. Illogical. Dysfunctional. Sociopathic. Neurotic. Psychotic.

I wish I had an answer to this problem that did not involve extreme violence and the threat of long-term incarceration in a penal institution. I have dreams of doing this to the so-called management team

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXXEnDLShz0&feature=player_detailpage

over and over and over and over again. Yeah, yeah, I know: I need anger management therapy. Getting it. Doesn't work.

TygerDawg
Blue Technik LLC
Virtuoso Robotics Engineering

http://www.bluetechnik.com

 

[cranky108]

We don't have a marketing group that asks for things from us, but we have an operations group that does.
In a recent project they asked for a new device, and we incorporated it as they asked. We then turned it over to them, as we explained that they wanted it, and we had no experence or desire to program it.
They also found they had no experence, and it was much harder to program than they thought.

So now when we are asked about something new at the last moment, we simply ask if they had made the last new thing work yet.

Yes they did find the manufacturer will program it, but for much more than there managment will allow.

So our solution is company politics work both ways.

 

[jmcoope3]

90% of the education I've had in engineering since graduation has been in how to properly shield your hindquarters from unwanted exploration with paperwork.

I have a piece of plotter paper taped above my desk that states:

DOCUMENT EVERYTHING
NOTHING OVER THE PHONE
EVERYTHING IN WRITING
NO SCOPE NO WORK
NO PO NO WORK

I'm also quite tempted to make that my internal e-mail signature.

 

[HDS]

Pick two? That is twice as many I we usually get.

The best way to combat scope creep is to have good project management.

For your situation I would take a good look at opportunity costs. What new project will you not be working on if this project gets delayed. Then the ball goes back to marketing to understand the trade offs and price that they will pay. if they really want these changes instead of the next new product they might really be important. Can these last minutes changes be rolled into a revision after production starts or saved for the next "year model"?

 

[btrueblood]

"The best way to combat scope creep is to have good project management."

Bingo. But it only works when people follow the plan. Politics will still get played, and if you pull out the spec. and show how revising it will cause the schedule to slip, you get labelled a bean-counting non-team-player by the marketing types.

How to prevent scope creep? Get the product into production before marketing can brainstorm new ideas. Another method I have seen happen, but not by deliberate methods on my part: get marketing interested in somebody else's new project, which deflects attention from yours.

 

[jmw]

The golden triangle is oft quoted in, surprise surprise, given the usual cost over-runs and high prices usually paid, US military specifications.
I was looking at one recently and there was none of that "pick any two" business. Whichever two they got they wanted the third.

The problem with product specifications is getting enough dialogue between the client and the manufacturer to identify what is necessary and what would be "nice to have".
A good product has to hit several key targets:
[li] It has to meet a need[/li]
[li] It has to perform as required [/li]
[li] There has to be the manufacturing and materials technology available to make it[/li]
[li] It has to hit the market price. [/li]
This ideally would be a linear development where everything is established at the onset and every one then works toward meeting the agreed specification.
But the reality is usually one of an iterative development. Inevitably it turns out that it costs more to make than was originally thought and some compromises need to be made.

In the case of a new product there is a marketing expression that should be remembered:

I don't want it right, I want it tomorrow.

This is because the first one to market will often dominate the market but time to market costs a third of the lifetime profits for each year of delay.
Of course, once there is some product in the market that delivers something of what is needed we enter a "me too" phase where new manufacturers have to come to market with none of the concessions made for a first device. They have to bring some compelling technical or commercial advantage to stand a chance.
In their favour is that the existing manufacturer, having secured a market share lives in fear of "cross capture" and wants to capitalise on the original product without spending more money than they have to.

New products can be a real challenge.

The very best target specification I was ever presented with said simply: "4-20mA and we'll pay $3000 a unit."
They would not be drawn any further.
Why?
Because when clients draw up a specification they can make one of two mistakes, out of ignorance about what can or cannot be achieved:
1) they write a wish list which may prove extremely expensive to develop, cost to much per unit and may even prove unattainable and in which case they can't interest a manufacturer.
2) they write a cautious specification which may set standards far too low which is no good to either.
In my case It put the onus on us to really understand the market and the market objectives. The client wouldn't even be clear why they wanted a new technology.

As an outsider we had to not only find a winning specification but also look for unique features that would make life very difficult for the competition to come back with a "me too" design.

Of course, any time you let management into the game you have a problem. In my case management wouldn't let me include all the features I wanted either hardware or software and they didn't want this to cross the boundary from the target market into other markets where it would take sales from far more expensive product (which I solved by creating product "brands").
Once completed the client then wanted all the features I had wanted to include but management would let me include and finally got them.

The thing is that if you are embarked on a one off, life is very very difficult and you really do have to get everything as right as possible to begin with. If it is a new product with suitable numbers to be produced the "I want it tomorrow" approach is better and then covered by the "Continuous Development" Mission Statement which is designed to cover for continuously either fixing problems or adding (and sometimes removing) features.




JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[KENAT]

One thing I've noticed at my current employer is often Engineering don't push back as firmly as they could.

More than once on a project that I'm not even the PM for I've asked questions like 'how long are you willing to delay release to get this feature' or 'how much more are you willing for it to cost' or 'which other project do we not work on to get this done in time' and similar phrases indicating that changes to scope have an impact.

Obviously, if a senior manager (or their lackey) really wants it then you can only push back so hard before the solution becomes taking it out on you. However, my assessment is we can probably push back harder, and more often than we do.

(Time may eventually show that I was wrong in this assessment but hey - it sounds good right now.)

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[patprimmer]

KENAT

I think you are correct.

That approach has got me both promoted and demoted, depending on the quality of management.

Overall, it depends largely on how you go about it.

If you say we cant do that because blah blah blah you will strike resistence.

If you say sure we can do that, however it will take blah blah blah. Are you prepared for that or is it still worthwhile if that is the cost.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376 for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm

for site rules

 

[MadMango]

Yes, provide positive responses with realistic results, and never say can't, crazy, or impossible.

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of these Forums?

 

[btrueblood]

"never say can't, crazy, or impossible. "

Until they start asking for cold fusion, or flying cars...

 

[cranky108]

Thay have flying cars now.