Lessons Learned: Things Gone Right, Things Gone Wrong

Friday, August 23, 2024

Project Name Daimler MFA2 CMS & CSR

Project Manager Name Rebecca Findlay

Things Gone Right (TGR) Things Gone Wrong (TGW)

Item No. Gate No. Recommendations & Comments Follow-Up Needed? Responsible
Situation Situation

Improve communication between

CSTM Germany design lead. Also
ensure customer-specific
Critical characteristics not understood from R. Findlay/ ASNA
requirements training earlier in the
customer clearly early enough Engineering Director
program process, especially when
there is a different location who is
design lead
1 1 Yes
Prototype part creation and development in DE Assign more travel budget early in the
2 2 should have had more participation from NA team program timeline No
Weekly meeting with Germany established to
3 2 review open program items No

NA team does not have direct line to

customer, and poor communication
with DE team. Future global projects
Assumptions made regarding customer need to establish a direct line to the
wants/needs, that proved to be innacurate. customer for CSTM in each region, or
Caused delays in timing. the lead region needs to take more
time to transfer custsomer knowledge
and expectations to the following
region
4 3 No
Excellent participation from Plant personnel
regarding wants/needs and support for
completing milestone tasks
5 3 No

Implement weekly or twice monthly

meeting with every
Production equipment delays caused by change in tooling/equipment supplier, even
G. Borreson/Advance
design and lack of oversight of equipment/tooling when things seem to be going well.
Process Engineering
suppliers Have once per month routine visits to
suppliers for long lead items. Improve
early identification of risks at suppliers
6 3 Yes

Carry knowledge learned regarding

import/export to future Mexico
programs. Inform other PM's of
Unanticipated delays at US/Mexico border
Mexico programs what to expect for
crossing due to inexperience of moving
timing & startup budget cost required
equipment/material to Mexico. Created timing
to pay for import/export. Inform
delays and unexpected costs
account managers and Cost Estimating
so that they can build it into upfront
assumptions
7 3 Yes R. Findlay
Project Gate Review methodology requires
improvement. Gate Review Checklists are dated Procedure to be revisited as part of
and not driving tasks at the right time in the Product Development Process PDP.
project.
8 All Yes R. Findlay
Provide feedback to ASNA IT. For
future new plant openings, a greater
Technology risk in SLP impacted project timing
upfront emphasis related to on-site
and ease of team meetings/communications
technology/communications to be
9 3&4 implemented. Yes R. Findlay
Teams should feel encouraged to
Too much reliance on email communication with
make phone calls to global partners
global stakeholders.
instead of only email.
10 All No
Good enforcement of CSTM specification
requirements at Equipment and Tooling vendors
to approve shipment of conforming
11 3&4 equipment/tooling No

Ensure that equipment does more

than minimally meet CSTM
Repeatability of some equipment after shipment
specification, and is more robust prior G. Borreson/Advance
to Mexico is inadequate, requiring additional on-
to shipping. This will require more Process Engineering
site vendor support.
time spent at and with vendor during
development and build.
12 3&4 Yes