ORION Systm (A)*

Index:

i. Introduction…………………………………………………………….2

ii. Question 1 and the Answer……………………………………..3

iii. Question 2 and the Answer……………………………………..6

iv. Team Members Performance And Grade…………………7

v. Conclusion

Group 28
1
ORION Systm (A)*

Introduction
Mike Rosas is the project manager who in charge of a high-profile
government project, Jaguar. He has to organize his team under ORION
system which is a division of large aerospace company. ORION evolved
form a project organization into a matrix structure to converse costs and
better utilize limited resources.
Nevertheless, Rosas foces to some problems after completed a major
assessment.

1. Higher than expected production cost: It’s mainly due to “thrown

over the wall” phenomenon that very little design for
manufacturability was done, and the production ramp was
complicated,inefficient,and stressful to the people in the plant.
2. Quality: not enough attention was devoted to incorporating quality
consideration into the original design of product.
3. Problems with customer support: A) User manuals and technical
documentation failed to address all of a customer’s concerns. B)
Inadequate follow-up training.
4. Lack of strong project ownership: a) Shifting back and forth of
personnel caused low efficient. b) Poor performance of staffs.
5. Scope creep: lost focus on practical considerations. Costly delays and
sometimes modifications were inconsistent with customer
requirements.

This report summarize the discussion on the web-based tutorial made

by Group 28 . We came up with recommendations for Rosas to optimize
Jaguar with the knowledge and skills we have learnt during week 4.

Group 28
2
ORION Systm (A)*

Question 1
What recommendations would you make to Rosas about organizing
the Jaguar project, and why?

According to this case, ORION is organized by a matrix structure which

is shared resources and personnel.There are five main problems in the
existing organization.

We all agree with that Jaguar is a high-profile project and brings long
term strategic advantages, such as procurement of future contract with
government, it’s worth to invest more resources. Despite existing an
argument, most of us agree with that Rosas should organize a dedicated
design team in Jaguar organization, Figure 1, which includes Core design
teams ,Quality control engineers, ILS engineers and a Manufacturing
design team to make staffs focus on their work in Jaguar and avoid
distracting resources(personnel,time….etc) to other
projects.Meanwhile,it helps break down the communication barrier
between design and manufacture. It might have internal strife happened
in dedicated team.However, this problem could be solved by frequent
communication.

Group 28
3
ORION Systm (A)*

Figure 1

Project Manager

Deputy
Quality Assurance Dedicated Core
planning&control
Manager Design Team
Manager

Electronics system Mechanic system Manufacturing Dedicated Core

ILS Manager
engineer engineer Manager Design Team

Manufacturing Quality design Dedicated Core

ILS design team
design team team Design Team

Dedicated Core
Design Team

Work together:

Quality
To address the quality concerns the quality manager is necessary. It is
noted that quality issues are handled after the production process. The
quality manager will liaise with the design and the production team
within all stages. Therefore, the QA manager role will be reducing the
time of delivery as well as increasing the quality.

Group 28
4
ORION Systm (A)*

Problems with customer support

It is stated that there are problems concerned with customer support
and also design engineers not focusing on practical considerations with
their designs. It is obvious that the design engineers need to get in touch
with the front-line managers or team members who are more closely
related to the users. Rosas has to frequently arrange production
meetings to get everyone in touch and receiving feedback on the
progression of the project.

Scope creep
To solve scope creep, there are four main ideas.
Firstly, It is very important for a PM to define his goals to his
subordinates.
Next, having an ILS manager and a production manager would
probably improve things. The ILS manager should raise any
impractical issues regarding aftermarket usage and the production
manager should bring any issues regarding production impracticality to
the design team's concern.
Thirdly, PM should have intensive conferences with design team
leaders to strengthen communication and pull the creeped works back
on track.
Finally, the manufacturing design team and market department should
feedback the information about producing cost and customer
requirements to the PM.Then, the manager conference discuss the
solution of problems and adjust design under the principle of the
project.

Group 28
5
ORION Systm (A)*

Question 2
How would you change the organizational chart and

master plan to reflect these changes?

The change of organizational chart is as bellow,Figure 1,and the reflected
master plan see the Figure 2.

Figure 1

Project Manager

Deputy
Quality Assurance Dedicated Design
planning&control
Manager Team
Manager

Electronics system Mechanic system Manufacturing Dedicated Design

ILS Manager
engineer engineer Manager Team

Manufacturing Quality design Dedicated Design

ILS design team
design team team Team

Dedicated Design
Team

Group 28
6
ORION Systm (A)*

In order to solve problems in the early stages, it would be better to

start "Documentation and training program" and "Build production line
and test equipment" in the early design phase. We suggest that both of
them should be started in the stage of PDR.

In addition, “Quality assurance" needs to start in the beginning of design

until the end of project to insure that the quality is qualified in
every process.

Figure 2

Activities/Time 5-7 Years 1-4 years

Design review
SDR PDR CDR TRR PRR

Design and
development Laboratory test Environment test Production
and delivery
Production and
delivery Build production line and test equipment
Training
ILS
Documentation/Training program
Quality
assurance Quality control/design Customer
feedback

Group 28
7
ORION Systm (A)*

Team Members Performance and Grade

There is a table; Figure 3, with four indicators used to assess

each team member’s performance .Every team member is

evaluated according to their contribution to this project.

Figure 3
Performance Score
Participation: This means that if 4
preoccupation has been shown to the
discussion, giving comments and
feedback to other team members’
Comments.
Consistent Comments: This is related to 3
the consistency of each comment
based on content and also in presentation
and vocabulary
Plan Following. 1
Supportive and Cooperative Attitude to 2
others team members.
Total Score 10

Group 28
8
ORION Systm (A)*

1. Kang Lim
Performance Score
Participation: This means that if 4/4
preoccupation has been shown to the
discussion, giving comments and
feedback to other team members’
Comments.
Consistent Comments: This is related to 2/3
the consistency of each comment
based on content and also in presentation
and vocabulary
Plan Following. 1/1
Supportive and Cooperative Attitude to 2/2
others team members.
Total 9

2. Andrea Gonzalez
Performance Score
Participation: This means that if 4/4
preoccupation has been shown to the
discussion, giving comments and feedback
to other team members’
Comments.
Consistent Comments: This is related to 2.5/3
the consistency of each comment
based on content and also in presentation
and vocabulary
Plan Following. 1
Supportive and Cooperative Attitude to 2
others team members.
Total Score 9.5

Group 28
9
ORION Systm (A)*

3. Xiang Ji
Performance Score
Participation: This means that if 3.5/4
preoccupation has been shown to the
discussion, giving comments and
feedback to other team members’
Comments.
Consistent Comments: This is related to 2/3
the consistency of each comment
based on content and also in presentation
and vocabulary
Plan Following. 1/1
Supportive and Cooperative Attitude to 2/2
others team members.
Total 8.5

4. Shirin Litkouhi
Performance Score
Participation: This means that if 3/4
preoccupation has been shown to the
discussion, giving comments and
feedback to other team members’
Comments.
Consistent Comments: This is related to 2/3
the consistency of each comment
based on content and also in presentation
and vocabulary
Plan Following. 1/1
Supportive and Cooperative Attitude to 2/2
others team members.
Total 8

Group 28
10
ORION Systm (A)*

Kuang Ting Hsia

Performance Score
Participation: This means that if 4/4
preoccupation has been shown to the
discussion, giving comments and
feedback to other team members’
Comments.
Consistent Comments: This is related to 3/3
the consistency of each comment
based on content and also in presentation
and vocabulary
Plan Following. 0.5/1
Supportive and Cooperative Attitude to 2/2
others team members.
Total 9.5

Group 28
11