Fine Tuning: A Collaborative Approach at Raytheon
Originally posted to our LinkedIn page HERE.
Introduction:
Raytheon is a defense industry contractor, a manufacturer, and services many systems and technologies. The Ground Terminal Group (GTG) was responsible for the operations and maintenance of Large Earth Terminal Systems (LETS). These systems use supervisory control and data acquisition systems (SCADA) to enable centralized and remote control of systems. As Systems Engineers, we were to provide uninterrupted operations of these critical systems.
Problem:
Operations were unintentionally but negatively impacted by changes to interfaces and systems. These changes were often implemented without input from the end users and with little supporting documentation. This led to multiple delays as engineers navigated new interfaces and confirm against standard procedures.
Operators expressed frustrations when changes intended to simplify their workflows or increase data visibility did not translate to operational benefits. This communication rift led to animosity between "operations" and "day" staff, as well as towards leadership perceived as out of touch with daily operations. Additionally, systems engineering staff faced grievances due to their infrequent and often untimely visits to the operations floor.
Solution:
Observing this disconnect over the course of operations, shift leads were contacted in order to propose greater collaboration with systems engineering. Meetings were arranged with systems engineering, input was gathered from operators, and a list compiled of interface, process, and changes to improve workflows for implementation of system updates.
A UX working group was created to enhance communication, author training documentation, and incorporate SE staff into the operations certification program. This fostered mutual understanding and collaboration. Monthly meetings with Systems Engineering were held to discuss upcoming changes and gather feedback. A process which allowed for necessary training and documentation to be developed, reducing confusion and operational delays.
Result:
The changes led to an over 80% decrease in the frequency and duration of operational delays caused by interface changes. Additionally, systems engineering certified one of their staff on the operational position, providing firsthand operational insight and reducing the time to translate ideas into actionable feedback. Tensions between engineering and operations staff decreased significantly.
Conclusion:
It took less than 10 resource hours per month over six months to improve collaboration between engineering and operations. This led to better user interfaces and experiences tailored to operational needs, enhancing system operability.
Whether in small teams or large organizations, systems and workflows should be developed with user input. Engineers should work with direct feedback from end users to ensure systems meet operational needs. Even a small investment of time can significantly improve operational uptime and user satisfaction, driving operational excellence and efficiency. Creating improvement, one project at a time.
