Lifecycle Value Framework for Tactical Aircraft Product Development

Due to a dramatic reduction in defense procurement, the benchmark for developing new defense systems today is performance at an affordable cost. In an attempt to encircle a more holistic perspective of value, lifecycle value has evolved as a concept within the Lean Aerospace Initiative, LAI. The implication of this is development of products incorporating lifecycle and long-term focus instead of a shortsighted cost cutting focus. The interest to reduce total cost of ownership while still improving performance, availability, and sustainability, other dimensions taken into account within the lifecycle value approach, falls well within this context. Several factors prevent enterprises from having a holistic perspective during product development. Some important aspects are increased complexity of the products and significant technological uncertainty. The combination of complexity in system design and the limits of individual human comprehension typically prevent a best value solution to be envisioned. The purpose of this research was to examine relative contributions in product development and determine factors that significantly promote abilities to consider and achieve lifecycle value. This paper contributes a maturity matrix based on important practices and lessons learned through extensive interview based case studies of three tactical aircraft programs, including experiences from more than 100 interviews.

A FRAMEWORK FOR ACHIEVING LIFECYCLE VALUE IN AEROSPACE PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

Creation of lifecycle value - a balance of performance with cost and other attributes - represents a challenge for the development of aerospace products in the twenty-first century. This paper examines the concept of lifecycle value that stems from existing approaches of value management and analysis, lifecycle costing, and systems engineering. To ascertain common characteristics of lifecycle value creation, case studies were done for four aircraft programs: F/A- 18E/F, JAS 39 Gripen, F-16C/D, and B-777. A lifecycle value creation framework is introduced, comprised of three phases: value identification, value proposition, value delivery. Based upon observed practices in the four case studies, six value creation attributes were identified. Capability maturity models for the six attributes and three value creation phases are presented. The resulting framework represents a starting point for programs seeking to create lifecycle value for aerospace products.

Benefits of Implementing Lean Practices and the Impact of the Lean Aerospace Initiative in the Defense Aerospace Industry and Government Agencies

In the 1980’s, many United States industrial organizations started developing new production processes to improve quality, reduce cost, and better respond to customer needs and the pressures of global competition. This new paradigm was coined Lean Production (or simply “Lean”) in the book The Machine That Changed The World published in 1990 by researchers from MIT’s International Motor Vehicle Program. In 1993, a consortium of US defense aerospace firms and the USAF Aeronautical Systems Center, together with the AFRL Materials and Manufacturing Directorate, started the Lean Aircraft Initiative (LAI) at MIT. With expansion in 1998 to include government space products, the program was renamed the Lean Aerospace Initiative. LAI’s vision is to “Significantly reduce the cost and cycle time for military aerospace products throughout the entire value chain while continuing to improve product performance.” By late 1998, 23 industry and 13 government organizations with paying memberships, along with MIT and the UAW were participating in the LAI.

Implementation Workshop: High Performance Work Organizations

Since the rise of the industrial revolution, there are few challenges that compare in scale and scope with the challenge of implementing lean principles in order to achieve high performance work systems. This report summarize key insights and learning by representatives from a cross section of organizations who are on this journey. Specifically, we report on findings from the first Lean Aircraft Initiative (LAI) Implementation Workshop, which was held on February 5-6, 1997.

Preliminary Observations on Program Instability

This white paper reports emerging findings at the end of Phase I of the Lean Aircraft Initiative in the Policy focus group area. Specifically, it provides details about research on program instability. Its objective is to discuss high-level findings detailing: 1) the relative contribution of different factors to a program’s overall instability; 2) the cost impact of program instability on acquisition programs; and 3) some strategies recommended by program managers for overcoming and/or mitigating the negative effects of program instability on their programs. Because this report comes as this research is underway, this is not meant to be a definitive document on the subject. Rather, is it anticipated that this research may potentially produce a number of reports on program instability-related topics. The government managers of military acquisition programs rated annual budget or production rate changes, changes in requirements, and technical difficulties as the three top contributors, respectively, to program instability. When asked to partition actual variance in their program’s planned cost and schedule to each of these factors, it was found that the combined effects of unplanned budget and requirement changes accounted for 5.2% annual cost growth and 20% total program schedule slip. At a rate of approximately 5% annual cost growth from these factors, it is easy to see that even conservative estimates of the cost benefits to be gained from acquisition reforms and process improvements can quickly be eclipsed by the added cost associated with program instability. Program management practices involving the integration of stakeholders from throughout the value chain into the decision making process were rated the most effective at avoiding program instability. The use of advanced information technologies was rated the most effective at mitigating the negative impact of program instability.

Summary of Inventory Pilot Project March 1993 - December 1994

The Lean Aircraft Initiative began in the summer of 1992 as a “quick look” into the feasibility of applying manufacturing principles that had been pioneered in the automobile industry, most notably the Toyota Production System, to the U.S. defense aircraft industry. Once it was established that “lean principles” (the term coined to describe the new paradigm in automobile manufacturing) were indeed applicable to aircraft manufacturing as well, the Initiative was broadened to include other segments of the defense aerospace industry. These consisted of electronics/avionics, engines, electro-mechanical systems, missiles, and space systems manufacturers. In early 1993, a formal framework was established in which 21 defense firms and the Air Force formed a consortium to support and participate in the Initiative at M.I.T.

Implementation Workshop: High Performance Work Organizations

Since the rise of the industrial revolution, there are few challenges that compare in scale and scope with the challenge of implementing lean principles in order to achieve high performance work systems. This report summarize key insights and learning by representatives from a cross section of organizations who are on this journey. Specifically, we report on findings from the first Lean Aircraft Initiative (LAI) Implementation Workshop, which was held on February 5-6, 1997. The report is not a “cookbook” or a “how to” manual. Rather, it is a summary of the first phase in a learning process. It is designed to codify lessons learning, facilitate diffusion among people not at the session, and set the stage for further learning about implementation.

Preliminary Observations on Program Instability

This white paper reports emerging findings at the end of Phase I of the Lean Aircraft Initiative in the Policy focus group area. Specifically, it provides details about research on program instability. Its objective is to discuss high-level findings detailing: 1) the relative contribution of different factors to a program’s overall instability; 2) the cost impact of program instability on acquisition programs; and 3) some strategies recommended by program managers for overcoming and/or mitigating the negative effects of program instability on their programs. Because this report comes as this research is underway, this is not meant to be a definitive document on the subject. Rather, is it anticipated that this research may potentially produce a number of reports on program instability-related topics. The government managers of military acquisition programs rated annual budget or production rate changes, changes in requirements, and technical difficulties as the three top contributors, respectively, to program instability. When asked to partition actual variance in their program’s planned cost and schedule to each of these factors, it was found that the combined effects of unplanned budget and requirement changes accounted for 5.2% annual cost growth and 20% total program schedule slip. At a rate of approximately 5% annual cost growth from these factors, it is easy to see that even conservative estimates of the cost benefits to be gained from acquisition reforms and process improvements can quickly be eclipsed by the added cost associated with program instability. Program management practices involving the integration of stakeholders from throughout the value chain into the decision making process were rated the most effective at avoiding program instability. The use of advanced information technologies was rated the most effective at mitigating the negative impact of program instability.