Just training, or sustainable change?

Managers often underestimate the difficulty of creating a sustainable change. Favourite ploys are to buy a tool, or send someone on a training course with instructions to "teach the rest of us when you get back".

Our experience is that most training is wasted, and it can be counter-productive if the individual is demoralised when he/she is unable to put the new skills into practice.

Off-the-shelf processes often become on-the-shelf ring binders. And tools on their own can be big time-wasters. All play and no product.

Our strategy is this: we change our clients at three levels:



Organisation
Because only by changing the organisation's ability to plan and act can the change be sustained.

Project
Because that's the level at which the action happens. Processes are enacted, skills are embedded.

Engineer
Because it's people that learn skills, do processes, and make your projects happen.



Only a full spectrum approach will do

Some improvement initiatives focus only on process. Some TQM projects in the 80's failed for this reason.

Some look only at skills. Most senior folk can remember trying to hire in the skills they needed, only to find that the recruits 'go native' and give up trying to change the way things are done.

Skills and processes and tools must be yoked together – a triangle of balance and support.

But what of quality assurance? A sustained change must be monitored. You won't get the funds for this kind of investment unless you can measure the performance indicators.

But we have our own agenda here. We are so protective of our reputation that we insist that you can use our brand names (like REVEAL) only if we can be sure that you will be successful.

So we offer an accreditation service, that will provide you with quality assurance, and offer us peace of mind.

Finally, we propose the old-fashioned notion that Rome wasn't built in a day.

Sustainable change needs nurturing, and we offer long-term support services to do just that.



A plan for careful action emerges

The sequence in the graphic on the left illustrates a typical plan for a pilot Capability Enhancement project.

1. Develop the process for the project.
2. Identify the skills needed in the project.
3. Develop the skills in the individual engineers, through a programme of training and mentoring.
4. Ensure that the process is embedded in the engineer's work instructions. A different sequence will be followed when the lessons from the pilot has been absorbed.
5. Select and adapt a tool for requirements management. Ensure that the tool is embedded into the project planning and reporting.
6. Install an accreditation scheme for your engineers. Integrate it with the HR systems of review and reward.
7. Embed the new process into the Quality Management Process. Set up a centre of excellence for the skill.

This is an illustration.

Other parts of the model are equally well considered – but a website is not the place to explain in full.



We cover all system engineering activities bar one



We don't pretend to know more than our clients about train design, track layout, aero engine control, radio systems (etc., etc. – delete as appropriate). That's your business, your crown jewels.

Our skills are in the fundamental systems engineering skills:

• Adaptive Delivery – how to plan and manage projects, driven by risk and lifecycle choices.
• Requirements engineering – we promote our REVEAL® method.
• Verification and validation – how to prove you're building it right and building the right thing.
• Software engineering – particular safety-critical applications. We can show you how to build applications up to the highest regulatory integrity levels (e.g. SIL4, ITSEC E6). We have all the tools.
• Safety Engineering – we have a world-class safety management team. What we don't know about safety management isn't worth knowing and we want to share our expertise.

It's hard and expensive, but worth it.

Sorry. You may have been expecting at this point to read that it was going to be a simple matter of hiring a Praxis High Integrity Systems consultant for a few days. Not so.

Systems Engineering is hard. That's why you employ Chartered Engineers with many years experience to do it.
Changing their ways of working is equally difficult – even for the most enthusiastic and intelligent cadre.

But if it were easy, anyone could do it. You would have no competitive advantage.

If it were easy, it would be no fun for us.

No. The real question is "is it worth it?"

The experience of our CE clients is that it is.

Typical engineering lifecycles for significant ventures (trains, engines, etc.) are long – many years. So the chances of your processes and skills being optimised by your own efforts are remote. It just takes too long to see the results before you make the next adjustment.

Our intervention will get you through the learning curve faster and with a greater assurance of sustainability. It'll stick.