Cagle R.B. - Blueprint for Project Recovery[c] A Project Management Guide (2003)(en)
.pdfA T T A C H M E N T 8
|
|
Y |
|
F |
|
REQUIREMENTS FLOW- |
||
|
M |
|
DOWN MATRIXL |
||
A |
|
|
E |
|
|
T |
|
|
You can look at a Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM) as a horizontal
function and a Requirements Flow-Down Matrix (RFM) as a vertical function. The RTM traces where a requirement appears in the overall process while the RFM shows where a requirement has been allocated. Both apply to both prime and subcontractors. The subcontractor versions are usually preceded with an ‘‘S’’ for differentiating between the two.
If you do not have a Requirements Flow-Down Matrix (or Plan), you can use Table A8-1 as a start. Modify the table for your own needs. Just be sure to not change the concepts of content and flow.
In the case of the RFM, there are two levels or sets of requirements to be flowed down. The first is the requirement from the customer as contained in
245
246 |
|
|
|
B L U E P R I N T |
F O R P R O J E C T |
R E C O V E R Y |
|||
|
T a b l e A 8 - 1 — R e q u i r e m e n t s F l o w - D o w n M a t r i x ( R F M ) |
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company |
|
Design |
|
S/C Plan |
S/C A |
|
S/C B |
Spec Para |
|
Reqt |
WBS |
Plan Para |
|
Para |
Para |
|
Para |
1.3.2 |
|
|
02-03-01 |
5.3.2 |
|
5.3.2 |
1.3.2 |
|
1.3.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3.3 |
|
|
02-03-02 |
5.3.3 |
|
5.3.3 |
1.3.3 |
|
N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3.4 |
|
|
02-03-03 |
5.3.4 |
|
5.3.4 |
1.3.4 |
|
1.3.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
QA Plan |
04-01-01 |
8.2.6 |
|
8.2.6 |
4.3.6 |
|
4.3.6 |
|
|
CM Plan |
05-01-01 |
9.3.1 |
|
9.3.1 |
5.6.2 |
|
5.6.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the SOW or specification. The second is a requirement demanded by enterprise policy.
In some cases, a requirement may be flowed down to one subcontractor and not another. Observe Spec Para Requirement 1.3.3 in the table cross-referenced to Subcontractor B. Such requirements could be those that are product-specific; perhaps Subcontractor A provides that kind of product but Subcontractor B does not.
248 |
|
|
|
|
|
B L U E P R I N T |
F O R P R O J E C T |
R E C O V E R Y |
||||
|
|
T a b l e A 9 - 1 — D a t a D e l i v e r y M a t r i x |
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doc No |
Title |
Resp. |
|
Format |
First Del |
Frequency |
||||||
A-0001 |
Monthly Progress |
Jones |
|
DID 1234 |
30 days |
Monthly |
||||||
|
|
Report |
|
|
|
|
|
ARO1 |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T-0001 |
System Test |
|
Smith |
|
DID 2345 |
System Test minus |
|
One time |
||||
|
|
Package |
|
|
|
|
|
30 days |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T-0002 |
System Test |
|
Harris |
|
DID 4567 |
System Test plus |
|
One time |
||||
|
|
Results |
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 days |
|
|
|
1ARO: After Receipt of Order.
column, and the ‘‘Responsibility’’ column are shown in the report format. Usually, the Data Delivery Matrix is routed frequently to all responsible individuals as well as being posted in a central location in a ‘‘paper’’ program. On a ‘‘paperless’’ program the Data Delivery Matrix is provided on the Program Web site.
It is also useful to identify a cognizant individual (project manager, chief engineer, engineer, etc.) associated with each ‘‘X.’’ These people can act as internal experts (consultants) during the execution of your project.
250 |
|
|
|
|
B L U E P R I N T F O R |
P R O J E C T |
R E C O V E R Y |
||
|
|
|
T a b l e A 1 0 - 1 — C a p a b i l i t y M a t r i x |
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Project A |
Project B |
Project C |
Project D |
Project E |
Project F |
||
Task 1 |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
Task 2 |
|
X |
|
X |
|
X |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 4 |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 5 |
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
Task 6 |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 8 |
|
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
requirement or task should have an ‘‘X’’ at the intersect with at least one program. If not, continue with the process to try to bring the requirement to within your capabilities.
252 |
B L U E P R I N T F O R |
P R O J E C T R E C O V E R Y |
|
T a b l e A 1 1 - 1 — P o l i c y - t o - P l a n T a b l e |
|||
|
|
|
|
Policy |
Project/Program Plan |
|
Technical Plan |
11011-Startup |
4.1.1 |
|
2.1.1 |
11013-Funding |
5.1.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11024-PWA |
6.2.2 |
|
4.3.2 |
|
|
|
|
11025-Work Packages |
6.2.3 |
|
4.3.3 |
|
|
|
|
11027-Performance Measurement |
7.4.4 |
|
5.4.3 |
11041-Program Reviews |
8.2.2 |
|
6.2.3 |
|
|
|
|
11044-Action Items |
9.1.1 |
|
7.2.2 |
|
|
|
|
15012-In-Process Reviews |
|
|
6.2.4 |
|
|
|
|
15026-Engineering Drawings |
|
|
8.1.1 |
15033-Specifications |
|
|
9.2.2 |
|
|
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
B L U E P R I N T F O R |
P R O J E C T |
R E C O V E R Y |
||||
|
|
|
|
T a b l e A 1 2 - 1 — E x p e r i e n c e W i n d o w |
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Have Customer |
|
|
Have Product |
|
Capability to |
|||
Condition |
|
|
Experience |
|
|
Experience |
|
|
Perform |
||||
|
1 |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
|
Yes |
|
|
|
High |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
No |
|
|
Yes |
|
Moderate |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
|
No |
|
|
|
Low |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
No |
|
|
No |
|
Unknown |
|||
|
|
|
|
T a b l e A 1 2 - 2 — C a p a b i l i t y M a t r i x |
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Project A |
|
Project B |
|
Project C |
Project D |
Project E |
|
Project F |
|||
Task 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 2 |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
Task 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 5 |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
Task 7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 8 |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Task 9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|