Please login or join to subscribe to this thread
You can do some, but still need an overall plan in order to be efficient. Some activities like disturbed systems tests, flight tests, re-installation of interiors, cargo linings, etc. you only want to do once, so there is still significant macro level sequencing required. I have seen it done where there is an insistence on completing certain jobs on time but in the wrong sequence, which leads to a ton of rework when it comes time for the next job, like removing all the newly installed seats to put the aft galleys back in.
Remember that there is overhead of a sprint-based cadence so ensure that the benefits outweigh those overhead costs. Kanban might be another alternative...
I agree with Kiron, a Lankan board approach may work better than a scrum based activity. With Kanban you still divide up the work into small work pieces and everyone on the team works to set the priorities and cadence. If a problem arises you can reshuffle the priorities based on other things at a daily meeting.
Kanban works best for work that comes in waves. The goal in Kanban is to ensure that you keep your in-progress as close to maximum capability as possible.
I total get your point and you are totally right, we have a lot of dependencies. Maybe the best approach should be creating an overall plan after the inspection phase (because only after it we will know all the dependencies that this possible extra work will cause) focusing on the dependencies With it, on the sprint planning meeting, we will make sure that the work that we will commit to perform will not have the necessity to be reworked on the next sprints.
Thank you for your feedback
Kanbans are used heavily by the OEM in production fabrication. An MRO has to account for inevitable and significant spikes less frequently found with new hardware. The unknowns discovered in the inspection process can immediately derail a lot of planned work. Problems discovered can involve a lot of engineering, including OEM input as to the acceptable fix, and then require fabrication or procurement of replacement components before work can move forward.
There are a variety of ways to combine tools and methods (and the OEM combines many), but they have to account for the component, system, and vehicle level nature of the complete system.
If it's a big job, start with a high level end to end plan. That makes you think it through even though you will deviate off plan. Once you do your inspection and find the inevitable problems, adjust the plan you thought through and apply efficient methods where you can, but at the right times.
Unfortunately you don't provide enough info to suggest much more. I can't even say if you're talking small aircraft or large or minor to major maintenance. I'm assuming large scale because it's what I know. I'd be very interested to discuss more, but not anonymously.
Please login or join to reply