Figure 4: The current Development process developed using (https://lucid.app/lucidchart/, 2021)
Tidd (2005) noted that “Innovation is driven by the ability to see connections”. This is the triggering event of the current process yet; we seem to miss all the opportunities at hand.
Figure 4 shows the existing development process as the linear process that it is. There is always one item to be completed prior to moving onto the next. The development timeline correctly shows the time it takes to deliver one change. In an environment where there are many users, different cultures it is assumed that the needs will be different as well. Thus, the demand will be bigger. This is one contributor to the high number of tickets.
Design Thinking is an iterative non-linear process as per Dam (2018)
Figure 5: The Development Sprint Agile approach developed using (https://lucid.app/lucidchart, 2021)
Figure 5 shows the agile approach as a solution to service improvement from the traditional waterfall approach. Szalvay (2004) discuss the shortfalls of the Waterfall approach and calls it a sequential method where requirements must be known upfront.
In an environment such as nuclear with multiple challenges and changes it is very difficult to achieve this and the result can be observed by looking at the high support ticket numbers in our example.
Trends showed a tremendous increase in support ticket numbers from 1000 in 2019 to a similar figure in 2020 due to lockdown with Covid and to date this seems to be even higher for this year.
Figure 5 seems to be the most logical answer for a change in strategy and if the user needs are addressed it would most certainly assist with a process improvement in certain areas. The thinking behind the Development Sprints is that users know what they want but, they are not always capable of translating the requirement or need into a specific requirements document for the Functional Team. This mismatch in understanding often leads to the Development team not meeting the requirements of the user. Chavez-Mercado (1994) showed how Design Thinking and Prototyping can work in this industry. Chavez-Mercado (1994) took a very big leap with their rapid prototyping of control room software. They did this on Breeder Reactors which at the time broke the mould of our ultra-conservatism. Today in certain plants it is still very difficult to convince certain people that this industry can transform digitally.
Using the Development Sprints, it is collaborative in that all the stakeholders are involved during the whole creative process. The Functional Team are responsible for the creation of Paper prototyping. Carr (1997)defines a prototype to be the capturing of a requirement of a future system. This then becomes the goal of prototyping in that it should show how the requirement will look like. At least in paper format. During the collaborative design process the Developers will be at hand along with the Functional Team as Subject Matter Experts and including the Business Relationship Management team to ensure all the role players are present. This will ensure brainstorming and rapid prototyping of solutions.
Figure 6: Shows a screenshot of how a realistic requirement will look like.
Picture sourced from: (https://www.erpfixers.com, 2017).
Figure 6 shows how prototyping might help in the users understanding of his requirement and this will assist in clarifying any issues. This will reduce timelines to delivery since every stakeholder will be on the same page.
In the nuclear industry where most software applications are integrated with each other there might be a greater need to establish agreements with all parties involved to ensure alignment.
Nielsen (1997) defines the Fix-It-Now (FIN) Team as “a small self-directed team”. The FIN process is used within the nuclear industry to rapidly address any plant issue or concern from a maintenance point of view. In recent years, emergent engineering teams have surfaced as well to ensure that production issues or plant technical concerns are timeously addressed. The question may be asked why ICT and OT teams are still focusing on Waterfall methods when the rest of the Core Functional groups are moving towards Rapid Response organizations. This validates the move towards Design Thinking and Rapid Prototyping to solve user needs.
References
https://lucid.app/lucidchart/. (2021, August 25). Retrieved from lucid.app: https://lucid.app/lucidchart/1dc3430d-dd8c-4c75-8c65-566b813073f4/edit?beaconFlowId=F48388AA11AC3422&page=0_0#
https://lucid.app/lucidchart. (2021, August 25). Retrieved from lucid.app: https://lucid.app/lucidchart/7cb24f85-6387-461e-a08f-a98194469317/edit?beaconFlowId=7ECBB6F7463043B4&page=0_0#
Tidd, J., Bessant, J. and Pavitt, K., 2005. Integrating technological, market and organizational change. Managing Innovation.
Dam, R. and Siang, T., 2018. What is design thinking and why is it so popular. Interaction Design Foundation.
Szalvay, V., 2004. An introduction to agile software development. Danube technologies, 3.
Chavez-Mercado, C., 1994. A methodology for a rapid prototyping environment for nuclear power plant control console design, testing, and evaluation. The Pennsylvania State University.
Carr, M. and Verner, J., 1997. Prototyping and software development approaches. Department of Information Systems, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, pp.319-338.
https://www.erpfixers.com. (2017, April 3 Viewed 25August2021). Retrieved from https://www.erpfixers.com/blog/sap-maintenance-order-management
Nielsen, F.M., 1997. The effects of the on-line maintenance work management strategy on nuclear plant performance (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).