The table below further illustrates analysis considerations: Table 2. Analysis Considerations Situation / Characteristics Analysis Considerations Determine if solutions that may have been put in place during the Phase are likely to stay in place and continue to work. If those were only temporary, the process Many respondents are reporting should be examined and new solution(s) developed and essentially the same item. implemented. If the item indicates a serious problem, it should receive a high priority and be worked on before others. If needed, an RCA should be conducted. Communications problems between contractors or between one or more contractors and CMS can sometimes be resolved through GTL involvement / There appears to be a pattern for actions, as can issues of Quality. Contract problems can the Category in which most items lead to contractor frustration - assistance from the GTL frequently occurred. For example, or Contracting Officer should be sought. Scope or other are they mostly: Quality, Time, problems should be looked at by ISDDG management Scope, or are they mostly related and adjustments made. All changes should be clearly to Communications breakdowns? communicated to all parties in a timely manner. Each issue of this types should be examined for how it may affect subsequent Phases, and assigned an appropriate priority. Occasionally, the written descriptions or items’ recommendations may be unclear. In this case it will be difficult for the PM and the Project Team to determine effective actions. When it happens, a representative of the group providing the item should be consulted. Ideally, the author of the item would provide clarification. If necessary the item can be re-written. Once the PM and Project Team fully understand the item, Lessons Learned write-up does not the necessary add-on information (Lesson Owner, make sense. priority) can be added to the item in the Lessons Learned Log. A worst case scenario would involve two contractors each writing independent items where each blames the other for the issue. When this happens, the PM must engage them both, as well as the appropriate GTL(s), in a dialog to discover the facts and identify the real problem. This is essential if the problem is to be addressed correctly and effectively. RCAs should be performed for complex problems that Item description and may significantly impact a Phase where the underlying recommendation is complex and reasons for an item are unclear. An RCA can point written in such a way that it is toward an effective solution. unclear why the issue is occurring.
The table below further illustrates analysis considerations: Table 2. Analysis Considerations Situation / Characteristics Analysis Considerations Many respondents are reporting essentially the same item. Determine if solutions that may have been put in place during the Phase are likely to stay in place and continue to work. If those were only temporary, the process should be examined and new solution(s) developed and implemented. If the item indicates a serious problem, it should receive a high priority and be worked on before others. If needed, an RCA should be conducted. There appears to be a pattern for the Category in which most items frequently occurred. For example, are they mostly: Quality, Time, Scope, or are they mostly related to Communications breakdowns? Communications problems between contractors or between one or more contractors and CMS can sometimes be resolved through GTL involvement / actions, as can issues of Quality. Contract problems can lead to contractor frustration - assistance from the GTL or Contracting Officer should be sought. Scope or other problems should be looked at by ISDDG management and adjustments made. All changes should be clearly communicated to all parties in a timely manner. Each issue of this types should be examined for how it may affect subsequent Phases, and assigned an appropriate priority. Lessons Learned write-up does not make sense. Occasionally, the items’ written descriptions or recommendations may be unclear. In this case it will be difficult for the PM and the Project Team to determine effective actions. When it happens, a representative of the group providing the item should be consulted. Ideally, the author of the item would provide clarification. If necessary the item can be re-written. Once the PM and Project Team fully understand the item, the necessary add-on information (Lesson Owner, priority) can be added to the item in the Lessons Learned Log. A worst case scenario would involve two contractors each writing independent items where each blames the other for the issue. When this happens, the PM must engage them both, as well as the appropriate GTL(s), in a dialog to discover the facts and identify the real problem. This is essential if the problem is to be addressed correctly and effectively. Item description and recommendation is complex and written in such a way that it is unclear why the issue is occurring. RCAs should be performed for complex problems that may significantly impact a Phase where the underlying reasons for an item are unclear. An RCA can point toward an effective solution.