Download Access this Content

Managing Change in a Change
Averse Environment
Mike Herzog
V.P. Quality and Mission Assurance
Pacific Scientific Energetic Materials Co.
Technologies
 Safe and Arm devices
 Separation Devices
 Cartridge Activated Devices
 Propellant Activated Devices
 Vehicle Arresting
 Green Energetics
 Oil/Natural Gas Exploration
Facilities & Core Competencies
Chandler, AZ
 AZ Operations
 Chandler - 57 Acre Site



~250 Non-Union Associates
100,000+ Square Feet Under Roof
Core Competencies: Cartridge/Propellant Actuated
Devices (CAD/PAD), Specialty Devices (ISD, S&A)
Initiators & Propellant Manufacturing
Valencia, CA
 CA Operations
 Valencia Business Park Site




Advance Technology Site
~30 Non-Union Associates
37,000 Square Feet Under Roof
Core Competencies: Smart Energetics Architecture
(SEATM), Smart Controllers, Detonators & Initiators
 Hollister - 270 Acre Site



~360 Non Union Associates
200,000+ Square Feet Under Roof
Core Competencies: CAD/PAD, Linear, Ordnance,
Electronic & Laser Systems, Vehicle Sub-Systems,
High Volume & Propellant Manufacturing, Specialty
Chemical Synthesis
Hollister, CA
Markets

Space/Launch Vehicles
 Flight Termination
 Payload Deployment/Recovery
 Stage Separation/Termination

Missiles & Munitions
 Control/Initiation/Termination
 Munitions Deployment

Aircraft & Life Support
 Countermeasures/Stores Release
 Emergency Egress
 Fire Suppression

Ground Vehicles
 Active Protective Systems
 Fire Suppression

UAV
 Flight Termination & Recovery
 Engine Start / Vehicle Launch

Commercial
 Aircraft & Petroleum

Specialty Chemicals
 Borohydride Chemistry
 Energetic Materials
Total Annual Sales: $150M
Change Management Dilemma
 For suppliers deep in the supply chain,
process change approval is painful
 Multiple layers of customers must approve
the requested change
 Contractual requirements typically dictate
process, but not really
 Suppliers want to avoid the ‘seek approval
or beg forgiveness’ scenario
Approval process can easily stifle
continual improvement
Typical Shared Process
Change Approval
PSEMC
Communication
Direct Customer
Customer
Customer
Prime
Program
Program
End Customer
End Customer
Typical layers of
approvals required
for proposed PSEMC
process changes
Proactive Changes (Optional)
 Continual improvement initiatives
 Design improvements
 Equipment and tooling improvements
 Lean and productivity improvements
 Poke-Yoke implementation
 PFMEA recommended actions
 Cost competitiveness (Ashton Carter
memorandum). Really optional?
Reactive Changes (Must)
 Changes as a result of FRB activities
 Changes as a result of a Corrective Action
Request
 Product or Process audit results
 Lot rejection
 Deviations and Waivers
 Obsolescence
Reactive change requests move through approval
process relatively quickly
Industry Expectations
 The Space and Defense Industry Quality
Management System requirements include
implementation of a robust change
management system
 Risk versus benefit of each change must be
considered
 An uncontrolled change is the biggest risk
 Perceived small, insignificant changes do
not always equal low risk
James Chiles’ Inviting Disaster contains several
examples of un-communicated, uncontrolled,
perceived insignificant changes that resulted
in disasters
Planning for Change
 Develop and implement a robust change
management process to include
documentation and records
 Communicate to the organization that
what they don’t think is a change is a
change
 Establish a standard forum where
proposed changes can be discussed,
documented and planned
 Provide communication to customer(s)
early on in the process
Purpose Of Change
Management (PSEMC Stance)
 To ensure that any proposed changes
are planned and implemented in a
manner that ensures comprehensive
validation activities are planned,
scheduled, conducted and documented,
PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION, in a way
that ensures quality and reliability are
not compromised.
Regardless of what customer requirements are,
this process is designed to ensure PSEMC
is doing the right thing
Powder Weigh Station
Case Study
 Consolidate powder weighing, loading
and pressing operations into 1 station
 Weigh powder into actual parts versus
vials
 Eliminates batching and promotes 1 pc.
Flow
 Incorporate mistake proofing feature
electronically connecting scale and
press. Press will not operate if scale
does not record acceptable value.
 Utilize existing approved equipment
 Current process clearly defined in
manufacturing instructions
Before Process Change
Weighing Vessel
Finished
Vials
Bulk
Powder
Vial poured into tooling within Press
Station
Single Weigh Station
Single Press Station
After Process Change
Consolidation Press
Weigh Scale
Load Tooling
Consolidated Weigh and Press Station
Process Change Request
Status
 Original communication requesting
approval for change sent September
2010
 Communication sent to 30 direct
customers
 A white paper explaining the change
attached to communication
 To date, 5 direct customers have
approved the change
Lessons Learned
 No matter how simple you believe
the proposed change is, the customer
will think it is significant
 Prepare and present a comprehensive
validation plan with communication
 Include ‘what’s in it for them’ in the
communication
 Anticipate customer questions and
address them in the communication
 Be prepared to field many questions
and concerns
 Be prepared to wait
PSEMC Change Management
Process Improvements
 Formal Change Management process
documented
 Process flow charted
 Proposed change form designed and
implemented
 Training conducted and documented
 Proposed changes presented by
originator at bi-weekly CCB
Change Management Form
Change Management
RAIL Number: _________
ENERGETIC MATERIALS CO.
Describe the proposed change:
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Why is this needed? (Justification/Urgency):
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Area: ____________
Date: _________
Desired Imp. Date:___________
Cognizant Engineer:________________________
Submitted by:___________
Area Manager/FFM:_____________________
CHECK ALL THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED AS A RESULT OF THIS CHANGE
(MOC) Management of Change
Documented Training Record
(BOM) Bill of Materials
Process Hazard Analysis
Validation Test Plan recorded in AGILE
(PFMEA) Process Failure Modes Effects Analysis
Validation Report recorded in AGILE
(FAI) First Article Inspection
RIOS
Preventative Maintenance
Customer Notification/Approval
(ATP) Acceptance Test Procedure
Drawings
Calibration
Engineering Report
Regulatory Approval (DCMA, BATFE, EPA)
Engineering Work Order
Tooling
Facility layout
Other (List below)
Flowchart
Forms Update
(MP) Manufacturing Planning
Internal Qualification and Report
Other PSEMC Facility Notification
Recommendation(s) or Directives:
Champion: ___________________________
Team Leader: __________________________________
Team Members: ______________________________________________________________________________
Signatures as required:
Quality: ________________________________________________ Date: ________
Design Engineering: ______________________________________ Date: ________
EH&S:
_____________________________________ Date: ________
Operations: ______________________________________________Date: ________
Manufacturing Engineering _________________________________ Date: ________
Program Management: _____________________________________Date: ________
NOTE: The signatures above only approve the proposal, the signatures do not give authority to make the change
until all relevant documentation has been reviewed, changed and/or approved and released in AGILE.
Obstacles to Change
 Legacy products and designs
 Cost implications
 Industry generally change and risk
averse
 No perceived benefit to customer(s)
 Time to approve requested changes
 Multiple tiers need to approve
requested change
 View may not be worth the climb
for suppliers
Overcoming Obstacles
 Ensure strict compliance to change
management process
 Ensure risks and benefits are identified
 Be confident in mitigating risks
 Ensure that appropriate actions are
planned to validate effectiveness of the
change
 Provide sufficient information to
customers regarding proposed change so
as to anticipate questions/concerns
 Commit to the change…. no matter how
long it may take to get approved.
In Summary
“Change means movement.
Movement means friction.
Only in the frictionless vacuum of
a nonexistent abstract world can
movement or change occur
without that abrasive friction of
conflict.”
- Saul Alinsky
1960’s writer and activist