当前位置：文档之家 › Evaluating The Strategic Implications Of Japanese IT Offshore Outsourcing In China And India

Evaluating The Strategic Implications Of Japanese IT Offshore Outsourcing In China And India

  • 格式：pdf
  • 大小：226.27 KB
  • 文档页数：12

Evaluating The Strategic ImplicationsOf Japanese IT Offshore OutsourcingIn China And IndiaRoblyn Simeon, San Francisco State University, USAABSTRACTMany studies have been done on the market, managerial and technological factors that impact IToutsourcing decisions. However, few of these studies have looked at institutional and culturalfactors influencing various approaches to outsourcing. Developments in Japanese IT softwareoutsourcing make it an excellent sector for studying the impact of such institutional and culturalfactors. This qualitative study looks at the contrasting motivations behind IT outsourcing to Indiaand China in order to gain insights into what the Japanese firms consider the key success factorsfor IT software offshore outsourcing. Preliminary indications are that old business relations, trust,language requirements, cultural similarity and the ability to capture certain idiosyncratic businesspractices and routines are essential factors driving Japanese IT outsourcing decisions.Keywords: Japanese Outsourcing, India, China, Emerging Markets, Information Technology INTRODUCTIONThe outsourcing phenomenon represents one of the most fundamental developments in global business strategies. As globalization accelerates and competition intensifies, outsourcing has become a strategic solution for many corporations and governments around the world. Consequently, there has been a lot of research done on the impact of and approaches to outsourcing. However, the majority of this research has focused on market, managerial and technological motivations for outsourcing strategies. Generally, these studies examine the determinants for the pace, duration, location, and impact of outsourcing activities.(Hall 2000; Gottschalk and Solli-Sæther 2005; Gottschalk and Solli-Sæther 2006)Few of these studies have been carried out on the institutional factors impacting the various approaches to outsourcing. These institutional factors include the importance of regulations, corporate culture, and embedded business relationships. Developments in Japanese IT outsourcing make it an excellent sector for studying the impact of institutional factors on outsourcing approaches. Embedded relationships, regulations and corporate culture have all played a significant role in Japanese IT outsourcing (Farrell 2005; McCoy 2006; Montes and Kleiner 2007).However, in order to understand the implications of Japanese outsourcing behavior, it is important to clarify the relationship between outsourcing in general and offshoring practices. McFarlan and Delacey point out that outsourcing refers to the contracting of independent third parties to execute well-defined business processes or services. This can take place in the local environment or elsewhere. On the other hand, offshoring refers to the moving of business processes to other countries – either by establishing an offshore subsidiary or contracting with an established firm to handle the outsourced process (King 2005; Koong, Liu et al. 2007) (McFarlan and Delacey, 2004) . This paper will focus on offshore outsourcing of software development by Japanese firms.Si nce the 1990’s, many Japanese companies have chosen to outsource all or large parts of their information technology system development and/or management in order to reduce costs and improve the quality of their systems. This paper examines the combined processes of “offshore outsourcing” in which companies contract third parties in other counties to execute certain business processes. The main purpose of this paper is to clarify whichmarket and institutional factors dominate Japanese IT-software offshore outsourcing decisions by doing a comparative analysis of China and India as offshore outsourcing locations. This qualitative exploration should also provide some insights into the future direction of Japanese IT software outsourcing.MARKET CHARACTERISTICS OF JAPANESE IT-SOFTWARE INDUSTRYJapan has the second largest IT market in the world after the US. The total size of Japan’s information services industry in 2005 was about 14.5 trillion Yen (US$124 billion). The industry employed about 600,000 people in 2003 (Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, Japan, 2004). Five giants (Fujitsu, IBM, NEC, Hitachi, and NTT Data) drive the industry. Their combined market share (consolidated number among group companies) reaches more than 50% of the IT service and software market. Around 5,600 other companies make up the rest of the 50% (Yamanoi, 2004).After the IT boom in 1995–2001, the growth of the Japanese IT industry slowed dramatically. Total revenues increased by only 0.2% from 2004 to 2005 due to a number of factors. First, the sluggish Japanese economy caused Japanese companies to be hesitant to invest in IT. Moreover, since Japanese firms have to spend 85% of their IT-related budget for the operation and maintenance of current systems, they have only 15% of resources to dedicate to new technology (Atmark IT, 2005).The slower growth resulted in fierce competition and a downward pressure on price. Vendors often lowered the price at the expense of profitability in order to get long-term contracts. Many of the companies were hoping to recoup their losses from after-sale service contracts such as the support and upgrading of their IT systems.Software development is a critically important part of the Japanese IT sector. The software developers can be categorized into three groups –Maker, User, and Independent System Integrator (so-called SIer). The Maker group consists of computer manufacturers and their subsidiary companies which provide total system solutions including software development and support as well as hardware. Representative companies are Fujitsu, NEC, Hitachi and IBM. Companies in the User group are former IT divisions which we re spun off from parent “user” companies in order to transform themselves into profit centers from cost centers. Most of the large players in financial, manufacturing, and trading sectors keep vertical relationships with their IT subsidiary companies. Some of those spin-offs expanded their business to get contracts with other companies. Independent system integrators (SIers) do not have parents companies unlike companies of the Maker and User groups. They sometimes work as subcontractors for other IT companies in the Maker and User groups. (Atmark IT, 2005) (Tomiura 2005; Nagayama 2006)As we can see in Figure 1, custom software development accounts for as much as 47% of Japanese IT software industry’s total revenue. Since half of the software products category is made up of game software and basic software for computers, business software products accounts for only 5% of total revenue (METI, Japan, 2004).Another characteristic of Japanese IT is the use of embedded software. Embedded software is built into and used in various electronic products such as digital appliances, cell phones, industrial equipments, and vehicles. Recently, more and more electronics are controlled by embedded software and their functions have become increasingly important and complex. The advancement in networking technology, cheaper and smaller hardware memories, and fast product cycles have accelerated the demand for embedded software. The new cell phone models have many functions such as camera, text messaging, wireless internet, music player, PC synchronization, PDA, bill payment, and GPS. The embedded software used in these cell phones is comprised of more than 10 million lines of code (Asami, 2007).Figure 1: Annual Sales by Category of BusinessAccording to the estimates of the Japanese Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, the market for embedded software development is 2730 billion Yen ($25.4 billion). Although the number of Japanese engineers specialized in embedded software development is about 193,000, the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) estimates a potential shortfall of 94,000 engineers for this industry (METI, 2006).INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE JAPANESE IT-SOFTWARE SECTORInstitutional factors refer to a wide range of activities. Industry regulations, embedded relationships and old-style operating practices are all characteristic of the Japanese IT-software sector. In general, Japanese firms prefer custom software over off-the-shelf packages. One of the main reasons is a tendency to stick to the traditional ways of doing business. They are concerned that they might lose specific competencies by standardizing their special business processes. This desire to maintain unique business practices and routines impedes the effort to adapt package software that would streamline business processes and IT systems. In addition, package software often forces organizations to change the style of business transactions between their customers and business partners. As a result, companies choose to develop custom software which basically reproduces the needs of current operations (ITPro, 2007).The nature of business contracts, the use of Japanese language and long-term close relationship between customers and vendors are all factors that impact Japanese IT offshore-outsourcing practices. Since project specifications and contracts are not well defined or documented in the early stages, vendors have to modify the application over and over again during the development process. Vendors are required to read between the lines of poorly-defined specifications and sense the real requirements of clients. This kind of over-dependency on vendors is attributable to the long-term “keiretsu” relationships in the Japanese bus iness environment. Since the vendors generally belong to the same business group, they are expected to completely understand the client’s practices and offer the optimum IT systems. Quite often, these unique relationships have prevented them from adopting more efficient and standardized project management styles and methods.(Tomiura 2005; Waldenberger 2007) In Japan, there are serious concerns about the labor shortage in many industries due to the falling birthrate and the aging population. For many firms, it has become more difficult to secure new graduates who can support their companies far in the future. To make things worse, IT-related jobs are becoming less popular among new graduates mainly because of the long working-hours. Some call it “3K job” – Kitsui (hard), Kaerenai (cannot go home), and Kyuryo ga yasui (cheap salary) (Tech Soken, 2007). When companies cannot hire enough capable workers, the current staff has to work even longer hours, which could eventually result in higher employee turnover.Another area of concern is that many IT companies will eventually lose a lot of managers with large project experience. Most younger engineers do not have knowledge of old technologies, while a lot of companies still use “legacy” systems such as mainframe computers. After the baby boomers retire, IT companies might not be able to secure enough engineers to support their clients’ old s ystems. The older specialists know how the many different technologies have been put together to make the system work and they are aware of the kind of relationships that have been established with their clients. Most of this embedded knowledge and relationships have not been fully shared with younger. All these factors could eventually lead to a scarcity of young capable workers at the same time that there is mass retirement of experienced managers.JAPANESE APPROACH TO IT-SOFTWARE OUTSOURCINGMore and more Japanese companies are interested in offshore-outsourcing of software development. About one forth of Japanese IT companies have outsourced part of their operations overseas, and more are interested in doing so. Based on the estimation by JISA (Japan Information Technology Services Industry Association), the market size of offshore development is more than $1.6 billion in 2002 (JISA, 2003). According to the estimation by Japanese Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, it could reach 200 billion Yen ($1.9 billion) by 2010 (Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan, 2007). Japanese IT outsourcing practices has several unique characteristics which are resulted from the distinctive aspects of Japanese IT industry.The number of Japanese companies which outsource IT software development to foreign countries is increasing. According to Table 1 which is based on the survey conducted by JEITA, JPSA, and JISA, about one fourth of IT companies have outsourced part of their software development overseas by 2004 (JEITA, JPSA, and JISA, 2005).Figure 2 shows that instead of directly dealing with offshore companies, firms are increasingly relying on third party Japanese companies to do outsourcing business. Many companies become more aware of the difficulties of offshore outsourcing after seeing the failure of other companies in this area. Therefore, more managers think it is safer and easier to ask a more experienced third-party to manage offshore development instead of doing it on their own (Figure 2).Figure 2: Outsourcing ApproachSource: JEITA, JPSA, and JISA, 2005We can see in Figure 3 that another Interesting tendency here is that IT companies owned by manufacturers outsource more than the other groups (Independent, User, and Foreign-Capital). The main reason could be the long history and experience of offshore outsourcing of their core business –manufacturing. A lot of Japanese manufactures have built factories and subsidiary companies in China and other countries. Some of the know-how of operations in foreign countries could be transferable to offshore outsourcing of IT system development. They can also leverage the local connection and relationships with government officers to access partners.Figure 3: Outsourcing Ratio and Type of Capital (2005)(“Maker” category includes computer makers.)Source: JEITA, JPSA, and JISA, 2005Despite some peculiar outsourcing practices, when surveyed, Japanese give a variety of rational reasons for outsourcing decisions. The four major rational criteria given by Japanese firms on how they choose offshore vendors are as follows (JEITA, JPSA, and JISA, 2005):1. Quality and availability of engineers2. Japanese proficiency3. Legitimacy of price4. Track record of business with Japanese companiesAlthough these criteria sound reasonable, some point out that Japanese companies do not have clearly defined criteria in choosing offshore vendors. In December 2006, Accenture conducted a survey to compare the IT offshore software development utilization capability between Japanese and US companies, on consignment by JEITA. They divided the whole process of offshore development into four steps; Stage1: Internal policy and criteria of offshore development, Stage2: Planning and contracting, Stage3: Management of development, and Stage4: Evaluation. For each step, they evaluated Japanese and US companies and rank them from Level 1 (No definition) to Level 5 (Periodic reexamination of criteria) in terms of how the criteria and the business process are institutionalized in the organization. Japanese companies were ranked lower than US organizations in the all stages of offshore development practices. Japanese companies do not have defined standard and procedure to go through offshore development nor internal systems to improve the operation process. In addition, Japanese companies do not involve offshore vendors until later stage, while US companies involve them from upstream operations such as system planning and designing. US companies which work with offshore vendors as business partners, not as subcontractors, are more likely to build integrated development teams. (JEITA & Accenture, 2006)The software offshore-outsourcing location decisions of Japanese firms generally take into account the business relationships, cultural, and process demands of their operations. By examining the comparative strengths and opportunities of outsourcing to China and India, we can gain a lot of insight into what are the key success factors for Japanese offshore software development.OUTSOURCING TO CHINA: STRENGTHS & OPPORTUNITIESBased on the data from CSIA (China Software Industry Association), the revenue of Chinese software industry reached 390 billion Yuan ($50.7 billion) in 2005. It increased by 40.3% from the previous year. The software export was 7.6% of the total revenue, reaching 30 billion Yuan ($3.9 billion). The industry employed 900,000 people (JISA, 2006). What makes China the most attractive outsourcing destination for Japanese companies is the large number of Japanese speakers/learners. The language is one of the major concerns Japanese companies because the majority of Japanese employees in the IT industry who are reluctant to do business with foreign partners in English or languages other than Japanese. In 2003, there were about 206,000 formal Japanese learners. That number is 20 times higher than in India. The number of applicants for the Japanese language proficiency test in China was recently more than 165,000 (30% of total applicants). In addition, about 74,300 Chinese students are learning in Japan as foreign students (about 63% of the foreign students in Japan) (JASSO, 2006).Xinhua reported that Dalian has 20,000 people working in the software outsourcing sector and 70 percent of them speak Japanese. In addition, about 40,000 students in Dalian are learning software technologies in five professional institutions and 22 colleges. Half of the students have received Japanese language training and will work for outsourcing business upon graduation” (Xinhua, 2007). After graduation, Chinese foreign students will also play an important role in outsourcing activities with Japan since they know both the language and the culture.Since the mid 1990’s, an underwater cable network has been developed across the Pacific Ocean and in East Asia. The network capacity between Japan and China increased significantly; especially after high-capacity cables were built in East Asia in 2001 and 2002 (Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan, 2007). In Table 2, it is clear that the private lines and IP-VPNs (Virtual Private Line) between Japan and China are a lot cheaper and have higher-capacity than the ones between Japan and India.Japan and China share a long history of cultural interaction. Until the Japanese government decided to close the country in 1600AD, the Japanese learned and adopted a variety of cultural elements, technologies, and political systems from one of the world's earliest civilizations. Therefore, many aspects of Japanese culture such as language components, philology, and art were influenced by Chinese culture. In addition to cultural similarity, having track record of business with Japanese companies is one of the most important criteria when Japanese companies choose offshore vendors. Chinese companies have these advantages because they already have done more IT outsourcing projects with the Japanese. Finally, since Chinese companies in manufacturing sector have experienced outsourcing business with Japanese companies for several decades, they are more familiar with the Japanese management style.China is geographically close to Japan. It takes only 3-6 hours to fly to major cities in China from Japan. Traveling between Japan and China are becoming easier and more convenient, now that many airlines compete toincrease the direct flights among major cities in Japan and China. For example, there are as many as 18 direct flights from Tokyo to Shanghai each day, and the flight only takes about 3 hours. Just an hour time difference also makes the business with Chinese partners easy.Strong domestic demand is a positive factor for Japanese companies considering outsourcing business in China in two ways. First, they can expect that the Chinese government will support the development of the Chinese IT industry. Second, for companies which see China not only as an outsourcing destination, but also as an emerging market, the strong domestic demand is appealing.If a Japanese outsourcer and its partner in China can offer innovative technologies or services at affordable prices, the Chinese government and domestic businesses could become customers. One such example was reported by the Wall Street Journal reported that “As part of efforts to reduce traffic congestion during the 2008 Olympic Games, the city of Beijing is forming an unusual technology partnership with Nissan Motor Co. to install a citywide navigation system (Chozick, 2007).” (Verma, 2005)OUTSOURCING TO INDIA: STRENGTHS & OPPORTUNITIESThe software and ITES (information technology enabled services) exports from India grew from US$ 12.9 billion in the year 2003-04 to US$ 23.6 billion in 2005-06. It is estimated that the total software and ITES exports from India will exceed US$ 31.3 billion during the year 2006-07. Software and services exports are likely to beat forecasts and exceed 32% in dollar terms during the year 2006-07 (Department of Information Technology, India, 2007). The offshore outsourcing sector employed nearly 700,000 people in 2005, according to the McKinsey Global Institute. By 2007-08, that workforce will consist of about 1,450,000 to 1,550,000 people, and the industry will account for 7 percent of India's GDP (McKinsey, 2007).In 2007, the AT Kearney study listed the top 50 global outsourcing destinations based on cost, people skills and availability, and business environment. India again was at the top, with a diminishing but still large lead over China in second place. The report says India's dominance is due to an "unbeatable mix" of low costs, deep technical and language skills, mature vendors and supportive government policies. It adds that wage inflation has been matched by corresponding increases in the supply and quality of skills (Business Week, 2007). Even with the wage of Indian engineers is rising, outsourcing to India remains a cost-effective choice because of the advancement in technology, process control, and the quality of products and services that companies offer. Although the Indian IT industry has the largest share in the IT outsourcing market, it gained only 2% of its revenue from Japan. Considering the fact that Japan has the second largest IT market (JISA, 2007), Indian companies have not been able to explore the huge opportunity.In India, as much as 85 companies reached the highest level (Level 5: Optimizing) of Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) (JISA, 2007). The fact that more than 80% of Level 5 certified companies are India-based proves that Indian companies possess the world-best skills of project management and quality control. Therefore, objectively, India should be the most attractive offshore location for quality-sensitive clients.In India, more than 25 companies employ over 5,000 workers, while only 5 companies employ more than 2,000 workers in China (75% of software companies in China employ less than 50 people.) (Okawa, 2005). More companies are ready for large projects with experienced project managers and programmers in India. Larger companies are also more capable of attracting, developing and retaining workers because they tend to attract more interesting and longer-term projects, provide better training opportunities, and offer more generous incentives (Filippo and Ip, 2005).India’s pool of young university graduates is estimated at 14 million -the largest of all 28 countries MGI has studied (McKinsey, 2007). Based on the data of US census and NASSCOM, the number of new graduates who acquired engineering degree in 2003 was 292,000 in India, 195,000 in China, 103,000 in Japan, 82,000 in Russia, 61,000 in the US, and 45,000 in South Korea (JISA, 2005). The large number of English speakers is also one of the major reasons why the US and European companies choose India as offshore destination. Another advantage of Indian companies is that they can divide up a project, assign each part to the appropriate engineers, assure thequality, reassemble the parts, and export the finished product. Executives of Indian companies believe that this highly sophisticated development method enables them to win competitions with local companies outside India (Kitagawa, 2007).The major Indian multinationals have branches overseas including in Japan and in China. They believe in their ability to coordinate global & local staff in each location. By using the services provided by those Indian multinationals, Japanese companies could benefit from their top-level quality and technology while being supported by Japanese staff. This could happen without needing to actually going to India and setting up operations by their own.COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF CHINA AND INDIAAreas of CompetenceChina appears to be the best destination for Japanese companies that wants to outsource small projects. In addition, Chinese companies have significant strength in embedded software development, coupled with their general success in the manufacturing sector. According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), China surpassed the United States as the world's top exporter of laptop computers, mobile phones and other ICT (information and communications technology) devices in 2004 (OECD, 2006). On the other hand, Indian companies have excellent reputation for are in high repute in the area of large system development, middleware package software production, customizing, and system consulting.Culture and ValuesThe Chinese Society is relatively homogeneous. Even though there are numerous dialects, 95% of the population is the Han Chinese, and most of them use one written language (Mandarin). There are many similarities between the Chinese and Japanese language and that makes it easier for them to understand some of the programming difficulties. On the other hand, the ethnic and linguistic diversity of India’s civilization with more than 15 recognized languages and an estimated 1,600 spoken dialects is astounding. There are vast numbers of different regional, social and economic groups, each with different cultural practices (Bhasin, B. 2007).Labor CostsThe monthly wage paid to local engineers by Japanese companies in Shanghai, China was $121- $266 in 2004, while it was $250- $408 in New Delhi, India (Iwami, 2005). Even though the wage in China is rising, it is still cheaper than in India. As more and more companies see the opportunities to outsource business to India, they have to compete for limited talents. In India, if an IT related employees feel that they are underpaid, they are often able to find another employer which offers higher salaries and fringe benefits without much difficulty. According to the research conducted by IDC India in September 2007, salaries of I ndia’s software professionals rose at an average of 18.7% and reached $15,300 (Kitagawa, 2007). Rising wages have become serious concern in India. For example, Apple “walked away” from India in 2006. It is said the reason was that India wasn’t as inexpensive as it used to be. The high turnover ratio and the competition for good people were other concerns (Kripalani and Burrows, 2006).Despite these issues, India has a general advantage over China in terms of offshore software development experience and achievement with U.S. clients. This could be a merit for Japanese companies which operate globally, because by forming a business partnership with Indian company, they can compete more effectively in the global market. A consultant from TATA Consultancy Services (TCS) says that more and more Japanese IT subsidiaries of financial and manufacturing sectors are visiting the head quarters of TCS, exploring the opportunities of offshore relationships. For example, Sony makes India its base of software development. For Kyocera, India is the second most important cell phone software development base after the US. NEC conducts training of new Japanese employees in India in order to acquire the most advanced IT skills. IBM Japan outsources to India some of their software development projects which awarded by Japanese customers. (TATA Consultancy Services, 2005).。

合集下载

运作管理第12版英文版hr_om12_ism_modE

运作管理第12版英文版hr_om12_ism_modE

EB U S I N E S S A N A L Y T IC S M OD U L ELearning CurvesD ISCUSSION Q UESTIONS1.Limitations of the use of learning curves include:⏹Any change in the process, product, or personnel, disruptsthe curve⏹Volume must increase for a learning curve to exist⏹Not all products, processes, or management styles benefitfrom learning to a significant degreeLO E.1: Define learning curveAACSB: Application of knowledge2.Some applications of the learning curve are: Internal man-power forecasting, scheduling, establishing costs and budgets; external purchasing and subcontracting of items; and strategic evaluation of company and industry performance, including costs and pricing.LO E.1: Define learning curveAACSB: Application of knowledge3.Three approaches to solving learning curve problems are by: doubling, learning curve tables, and a formula approach.LO E.2: Use the doubling concept to estimate times AACSB: Application of knowledge4.We cannot determine the implications for Great Lakes, Inc., if the engine in the tug boats is changed. Any change in product or process may disrupt the curve and require recalculations.LO E.4: Describe the strategic implications of learning curves AACSB: Reflective thinking5.Learning curves are not as applicable to assembly lines for the short run as in other activities because the whole line is paced to run/produce at a certain speed/output. Many lines mix technol-ogy, which is fixed-speed, with humans.AACSB: Reflective thinking6.Stable and standardized processes tend to have steeper de-clining learning curves.LO E.1: Define learning curveAACSB: Reflective thinking7.The doubling effect in learning curves means that each time output is doubled (say from 4 to 8 units), the time required to produce the doubled unit is x% of the time to produce the base unit, where x stands for the learning curve rate. So if the 4th unit took 10 hours and the learning curve rate is 85%, the 8th unit will take (0.85) (10 hours) = 8.5 hours.LO E.2: Use the doubling concept to estimate times AACSB: Analytical thinking 8. The following factors can obstruct the application of learning curves:⏹Organizations applying other organizations’ learningcurves instead of developing their own.⏹Lack of updated data for reevaluation⏹Any unfavorable alteration in processes, people, materials,and procedures⏹Low motivation levels among workers, lesser involvementof management, and unsupportive workplace cultureLO E.4: Describe the strategic implications of learning curves AACSB: Reflective thinkingA CTIVE M ODEL E XERCISE (AVAILABLE IN M Y OM-L AB)ACTIVE MODEL E.1: Unit Curve, Cumulative Curve, and Costs1.If the learning is not as good as expected and rises to 90%, how much will the 4th boat cost?$4,050,0002.What should the learning curve rate be to keep the total cost of the first 4 boats below $16,000,000?0.813.How many boats need to be produced before the cost of the next boat is at or below $4,000,000?2, the 3rd falls below $4 Mil.4.How many boats need to be produced before the average cost of each boat is below $4,000,000?5, the 6th falls below $4 Mil.E ND-OF-M ODULE P ROBLEMS (PROBLEMS WITH ASTERISKS APPEAR IN M Y OML AB ONLY)E.11st return takes 45 minutes(a) 2nd return takes (45 min)(0.85) = 38.25 min(b) 4th takes (38.25)(0.85) = 32.5 min(c) 8th takes (32.5)(0.85) = 27.6 minE.21st day took 9 hours and 23 min = 563 min(a) 2nd day = (563)(0.90) = 507 min (with rounding)(b) 4th day = (507)(0.90) = 456 min(c) 8th day = (456)(0.90) = 410 min(d) 16th day = (410)(0.90) = 369 minBUSINESS ANALYTICS MODULE E L E A R N I N G C U R V E S341 E.3(a) For the 25th unit, at an 80% learning factor, the learning-curve coefficient (from Table E.3) is 0.35515 ⨯ 0.355 = 5.325 minutes(b) For the first 10 units, at an 80% learning factor, thelearning-curve coefficient (from Table E.3) is 6.31515 ⨯ 6.315 = 94.725 minutesE.4Cumulative times using Table E.3:(a) First 3 = (2.746)(563) = 1,546(b) First 6 = (5.101)(563) = 2,872(c) First 8 = (6.574)(563) = 3,701(d) First 16 = (12.040)(563) = 6,779E.5T1 = 30 hr 80% learning curve(a) T5 = (30)(0.596) = 17.88 hr(b)51(30)(3.738)112.14 hr iT i===∑(c) T18 = (30)(0.394) = 11.82 hr(d) 181(30)(9.716)291.48 hr iT i===∑E.6$5,000 = cost/hr(a) T10 = T1(0.477) = 30(0.477) = 14.31 hr(b) Cost10 = (14.31 hr)($5,000/hr) = $71,550(c)101(30)(6.315)189.45 hours totaliT i===∑Cost for all 10 = (189.45)($5,000/hr) = $947,250E.7T1 = 112; Rate = 90%The cumulative factor for the 8th unit at 90%, Table E.3 is 6.574. So the first 8 units will take 6.574(112) = 736.29. The last 7 units will take 736.29 – 112 = 624.29 hours.E.8T1 = 5 hr T2 = 4 hr(a) Learning rate = 4/5 = 80%(b) T3 = T1⨯C = (5)(0.702) = 3.51(c) T4 = 5(0.640) = 3.2T5 = 5(0.596) = 2.98T6 = 5(0.562) = 2.81(d)615(4.299)21.5iT i =∑==E.9For the 15th unit at a 90% learning factor, the learning-curve coefficient (from Table E.3) is 0.663.6 ⨯ 0.663 = 3.978 hoursE.10T1 = 80 hoursT4 = ?Use the doubling effect twice to reach the 4th unit(a) 95% L.C.(0.95)(0.95)(80 hours) = 72.2 hours(b) 87% L.C.(0.87)(0.87)(80 hours) = 60.552 hours(c) 72% L.C.(0.72)(0.72)(80 hours) = 41.472 hoursE.11 (a) T4 = T1(0.92)(0.92) = 46 ⨯ 0.92 ⨯ 0.92 = 38.9 hoursT8 = T4(0.92) = 35.8 hours(b) T4 = T1(0.84)(0.84) = 46 ⨯ 0.84 ⨯ 0.84 = 32.4 hoursT8 = T4(0.84) = 27.3 hours(c) T4 = T1(0.77)(0.77) = 46 ⨯ 0.77 ⨯ 0.77 = 27.3 hoursT8 = T4(0.77) = 21.0 hoursE.12(a) For Susan: 4th unit required 5 hours; 8th unit required4 hoursWhen volume doubled from 4 to 8, learning improved 1 hour or 20% (1 hr/5 hr = 0.2) or a learningcurve of 80%.8048085, 0.640, so 7.81 for the first unit.644, 0.512, so 7.81 for the first unit0.51210th unit will require 0.4777.81 3.67 hoursN CN C∴=⇒∴=⇒∴⨯=So Susan will not make the standard; 10th unit is esti-mated to take 3.67 hours.(b) For Julie: 3rd unit required 4 hours; 6th unit required3 hoursWhen volume doubled from 3 to 6, learning im-proved 1 hour or 25% (1 hr/4 hr = 0.25) or a learningcurve of 75%7537564, 0.634 6.31 for the first unit0.6343, 0.475 6.31 for the first unit0.47510th unit will require 0.385 6.31 2.43 hoursN CN C∴=⇒⇒∴=⇒⇒∴⨯=Neither is expected to reach 1 hour by the 10th unit. E.13Using Table E.3, 6th unit at 80% = 0.56280620 minN=Thus,201st unit35.58 min0.562==Using Table E.3, 3rd unit at 80% = 0.702.Therefore the 3rd unit should require (35.58 ⨯0.702) = 24.98 min, or about 25 minutes. Or, using the doublingeffect, T3 = T6/C = 25 minutes.E.14T3= 20,000, Cost = $40/hour, 85% learning curve, Resolve for plane #1 N = 3, C = 0.773 for 85%20,000 hr25,873 hrs for plane #10.773=4156Now, 25,8730.723:so cost18,706 hours$40$748,24025,8730.686:so cost17,749 hours$40$709,96025,8730.657:so cost16,999 hours$40$67T T CTT=⨯=⨯=⨯==⨯=⨯==⨯=⨯=9,960342 BUSINESS ANALYTICS MODULE E L E A R N I N G C U R V E S=⨯=⨯==⨯=⨯==⨯=⨯==⨯=⨯=12113114115125,8730.55814,437 hrs25,8730.54814,178 25,8730.53913,946 25,8730.53013,713T T C T T C T T C T T C1215 through Cost =56,274$40$2,250,960T T =⨯∑=E.16 (a) Expected price at a volume of 1.4 ⨯ 1012 bits:⏹From Table E.3:Learning curve coefficient for 0.70 learning curve factor and doubling:C = 0.7000Cost:Cost = Base cost ⨯ Learning curve coefficient= 100 ⨯ 0.7000 = 70 milli-cents/bit(b) Expected price at a volume of 89.6 ⨯ 1012 bits⏹ Using the general learning curve formula: Cost of the n th unit = T N ⨯ L n where: T is the present unit cost, L is the learning curve factor, n is the number of times the volume will double over the present volume.⏹ For the present problem:T = 100 milli-cents/bit L = 0.7n = 7 (Note: 89.6/0.7 = 128 = 27)Therefore, cost per bit for a volume of 89.6 ⨯ 1012 is given by: Cost = 100 ⨯ 0.77 = 100 ⨯ 0.0823543 = 8.235 milli-cents/bit E.17 T 3 = 460; cost = $60/hour; 80% learning curve. Factor for 3rd unit, Table E.3 = 0.702Estimated time for turbine number 1 = 460/.702 = 655.27 Using factors from Table E.3T 4 = 655.27(0.64) = 419.37 hours = $25,162. T 5 = 655.27(0.596) = 390.54 hours = $23,432. T 6 = 655.27(0.562) = 368.26 hours = $22,096. E.18 Time to produce eighth plane = 28,718 hoursLearning factor = 0.80⏹ Time to produce first plane:⏹ From Table E.3: Learning curve coefficient for 0.80 learning curve factor and 8th unit:C = 0.5120⏹Time (first plane) is given by:Time to produce eighth Time Learning curve factor28,71856,090 hours 0.512plan 0e===⏹ Time to produce the tenth plane:⏹ Learning curve coefficient for 0.80 learning curve factor and 10th unit:C = 0.4765⏹Time (tenth plane) is then given by:Time = First plane time ⨯ C = 56,090 ⨯ 0.4765= 26,755 hoursNote rounding in Table E.3 to 0.477 for the value of C .E.19 (a) From Table E.3, the 40 units will require 700 ⨯ 13.723 =9,606.1 hours.(b) The average time per unit is 9,606.1/40 = 240.2 hours. (c) It will take 9,606.1/2,080 = 4.62 workers to completethe contract within 1 year. 1112112120120(a) 4 hrs; 85% learning curvethrough 48.24432.976 hrs. through 412.40249.608 hrs.T T T T T T T T T =→∑=⨯=→∑=⨯= (b) If 5th took 2.5 hours,2.53.644 hours for 1st 0.686= This implies T 1 → T 12 = 3.644 ⨯ 8.244 = 30.04 hrThe quote is high. The learning curve rate may have been better for the previous crew.E.21 (a) 4.0 is 90% of 4.44 hours(b) 4.44 ⨯ 0.729 = 3.24 hours (c) 4.44 ⨯ 6.574 = 29.2 hoursE.22 (a) The firm can offer 25,000 hours of labor (10 employees at 2,500 hours each). From Table E.3, five boats wouldrequire 6,000 ⨯ 4.339 = 26,034 hours, while four boats would require 6,000 ⨯ 3.556 = 21,336 hours. Thus four boats can be completed, but five cannot. (b) At the improved learning rate, five boats require 6,000⨯ 4.031 = 24,186, now within the stated labor limits.E.23 (a) In order to estimate the learning curve rate, we take theratios of the units that have doubled:The learning curve rates are not identical for each paired comparison, but since they are in the range of 85 percent to 86 percent (average = .854), we can safely use 85 percent.(b) Since the 6th report took 45 minutes, the 12th unit shouldtake 85 percent of 45 minutes, or 38.25 minutes. Multiply-ing again by 85 percent yields a time of 32.5 minutes for the 24th report. One more multiplication yields a time of 27.6 minutes for the 48th report. An even more exact answer can be found using Excel OM or POM for Windows software. Or a third approach is the formula T N = T 1C, where C ≈ 0.402 (from Table E.3):T 48 = (66)(0.402) = 26.5 minutesE.24 Time for first unit: 1 hourE.15E.20Report 2560.848Report 166Report 4480.85756Report 2Report 6450.84953Report 3Report 8410.85448Report 4========BUSINESS ANALYTICS MODULE E L E A R N I N G C U R V E S 343Learning factor: 80%⏹ Find time for unit 100:T 100 = T 1 ⨯ C 10th unit ⨯ C 10th unitwhere C 10th unit is obtained from Table E.3.⏹ From Table E.3: Learning curve coefficient for 0.80 learning curve factor and 10th unitC = 0.477⏹ Time (100th unit) is given by:Time = 1 ⨯ C ⨯ C = 1 ⨯ 0.477 ⨯ 0.477 = 0.227 hoursE.25 T 1 = $448 millionT 11 = $270 million====N 1111270.60448T T C T TGoing to Table E.3 for the 11th unit and reading across the row, we see that .60 falls between .57, for an 85% rate, and .695, for a 90% rate. So the rate is just above 85%.E.26* 1st transplant took 563 minutes.Using Table E.3 and 90% rate:(a) 3rd transplant = (0.846)(563) = 476.3 (b) 6th transplant = (0.762)(563) = 429 (c) 8th transplant = (0.729)(563) = 410.4 (d) 16th transplant = (0.656)(563) = 369.3E.27* 4th = 18 min.2nd = 20 min.The learning rate to this doubling is 90% (18/20 = .9, or 90%)(a) Thus, the 1st job, x , took 0.9x = 20 min or x = 20/0.9 =22.22 min.(b) 3rd job T 3 = T 1 ⨯ C = (22.22)(0.846) = 18.8 min. (c) 8th job T 8 = T 1 ⨯ C = (22.22)(0.729) = 16.2 min. (d) Learning rate is 90%. E.28* T 1 = 300 days, Rate = 85%61(300)(4.688)1406.4 days i i T ===∑So the time for landfills 2 through 6 is 1406.4 – 300 = 1106.4 daysE.29* The first exam took 20 minutes; all 10 exams are projected to take 120 minutes, implying a learning curve coefficient of 6.From Table E.3, this would imply a learning factor of approximately 77%.E.30* Time to produce first engine = 80,000 hoursLearning factor = 0.90⏹From Table E.3:Learning curve coefficient for 0.90 learning curve factor and 8th unit:C = 0.7290 Time to produce eighth engine = 80,000 ⨯ C= 80,000 ⨯ 0.7290 = 58,320 hoursE.31* Time for first unit: 1 hourLearning factor: 90%⏹Find time for unit 100:T 100 = T 1 ⨯ C 10th unit ⨯ C 10th unitwhere C 10th unit is obtained from Table E.3:⏹From Table E.3: Learning curve coefficient for 0.90 learning curve factor and 10th unit:C = 0.705⏹Time (100th unit) is given by:Time = 1 ⨯ C ⨯ C = 1 ⨯ 0.705 ⨯ 0.705 = 0.497 hoursE.32* Step 1: Calculate the log 10 of the quantities and the times as shown below:Number Time Log(num) Log(time) 1 4.80 0.00 0.68 2 4.50 0.30 0.65 3 4.43 0.48 0.65 4 4.05 0.60 0.61 5 3.91 0.70 0.59 10 3.72 1.00 0.57 15 3.31 1.18 0.52 20 3.37 1.30 0.53 25 3.07 1.40 0.49 30 2.98 1.48 0.47 35 2.71 1.54 0.43 40 2.65 1.60 0.42 50 2.56 1.70 0.41 100 2.28 2.00 0.36 150 2.53 2.18 0.40 2002.432.300.39Step 2: Plot the time taken as a function of the number packed and find the “trend,” as shown below:T IME AS A FUNCTION OF QUANTITY PRODUCEDStep 3: Calculate the slope of this line: Rise: –0.31; Run: 2; Slope ≅ –0.155Step 4: Multiply the slope by a scale factor to adjust for the physi-cal size of the vertical and horizontal scales. For the graph shown, the scale factor is approximately 17.5/48, giving: slope = -0.155 ⨯ 17.5/48 = -0.0565.344BUSINESS ANALYTICS MODULE E L E A R N I N G C U R V E SStep 5: Calculate the learning rate: Learning rate = 10–0.5650.877, or 88%.E.33(a) Management seems to be having considerable difficul-ty controlling costs. Actual cost is consistently aboveforecast or optimum; sometimes by as much as 30 per-cent–40 percent. In addition, costs for units 180–400are seen to rise drastically—exceeding forecast by asmuch as 250 percent.(b) Possible causes of excess cost include: fluctuations inthe quality of raw materials, turnover in the workforce,inconsistent maintenance of machinery, and changes inthe design of the product or production process. (If theproduct or process was changed, the company shouldhave abandoned the existing learning curve.) It is not atall clear, however, that the raw material, workforce, ormaintenance problems as individuals or in combination,are sufficient to explain the consistent and significantincrease in cost over the last 200 units produced.(c) The optimum time for the 10th unit is approximately110 hours.(d) The actual time for the 10th unit is approximately135 hours.C ASE S TUDYSMT’S NEGOTIATION WITH IBMThis case is adapted from a book by Raymond Corey,Procure-ment Management: Strategy, Organization, and Decision Making, CMI Publishing Company, Inc., Boston. There is some additional background provided in that book. The case shows actual use of learning curves as applied to this purchase from SMT by IBM.1(a).The advantage to IBM is that they have a reliable supplier that has been appropriately evaluated and should be able to per-form in accordance with the contract. The disadvantage is that IBM may be paying slightly more than they might have been able to purchase the parts for on an ad hoc basis.1(b).The advantage to SMT is that SMT has the business and knows what it will be paid. The disadvantage is that it may not make as much money on this contract, and that IBM knows its business and its costs. If SMT has indeed underestimated its costs by a significant amount, IBM’s knowledge of its business and its honesty in sharing information may prove to be beneficial.LO E.4: Describe the strategic implications of learning curves AACSB: Reflective thinking 2.Refer to Table E.1. SMT is to produce a new machine to be used in the manufacture of logic chips. This machine is a highly advanced design, and contains a network of piping of different materials, both plastic and metal. The aircraft assembly industry is probably as close as any to the SMT example in terms of the na-ture of the actual assembly, the need for precision and very high quality control standards, the frequency of engineering change orders, etc. Historically, aircraft assembly has enjoyed a learning curve of about 80 percent (see text for other comparisons).This case may provide a good demonstration of not only how one uses learning curves in a practical situation, but also, as to how a supplier and purchaser can deal honestly with each other to develop a long-term relationship.LO E.1: Define learning curveAACSB: Application of knowledge3.The limitations of learning curves include any change in the specification, process, or personnel. Changes in any of these are likely to adversely affect the curve and have negative conse-quences on time and cost. Additionally, in this case both IBM and SMT are assuming that SMT can move from a 90% curve to an 85% curve—an unproven assumption.Learning curves for estimating, as may be true in this case, are often time-based because dollars add another variable. As suggested in the case, overtime pay may be an issue. If overtime becomes an issue then costs could escalate even if the 85% learning curve is achieved.LO E.4: Describe the strategic implications of learning curves AACSB: Application of knowledge。

介绍新型武器的作文英语

介绍新型武器的作文英语

介绍新型武器的作文英语Title: The Advent of Next-Generation Weapons: Revolutionizing Warfare。

In the ever-evolving landscape of warfare, the emergence of next-generation weapons stands as a testament to human innovation and technological prowess. Thesecutting-edge armaments are poised to redefine the dynamics of conflict, offering unparalleled capabilities and reshaping strategies on the battlefield. From advanced drones to hypersonic missiles, the arsenal of tomorrow promises to be formidable and transformative.One of the most prominent advancements in modern warfare is the development of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) or drones. These aerial platforms haverevolutionized reconnaissance, surveillance, and precision strikes with their agility, stealth, and ability to operate in contested environments. Equipped with sophisticated sensors and guided munitions, drones can swiftly locate andeliminate targets with pinpoint accuracy, minimizing collateral damage and reducing the risk to human personnel. Moreover, the advent of autonomous drones capable of independent decision-making heralds a new era of unmanned warfare, where machines play an increasingly decisive rolein military operations.Another game-changing innovation is the rise ofdirected energy weapons (DEWs), which harness beams of concentrated electromagnetic energy to incapacitate or destroy targets. Unlike traditional kinetic weapons, DEWs operate at the speed of light, enabling instantaneous and precise engagement of threats. From laser systems capableof intercepting incoming missiles to microwave weapons designed to disable electronics, these futuristic technologies offer unparalleled speed, range, and effectiveness on the battlefield. Furthermore, DEWs present significant advantages in terms of cost and logistics, as they rely on electricity rather than conventional munitions, thereby reducing the logistical burden and environmental impact of military operations.Furthermore, the pursuit of hypersonic weapons represents a paradigm shift in strategic warfare, as these high-speed missiles travel at velocities exceeding Mach 5, rendering them virtually unstoppable and highly elusive to existing missile defense systems. By leveraging advanced propulsion and maneuvering capabilities, hypersonic missiles can penetrate enemy defenses with unprecedented speed and precision, delivering conventional or nuclear payloads with devastating effect. Moreover, their ability to strike targets anywhere on the globe within minutes challenges traditional notions of deterrence and escalatory dynamics, necessitating a reevaluation of strategic doctrines and defense postures.Additionally, advancements in cyber warfare andartificial intelligence (AI) are reshaping the modern battlefield by introducing new dimensions of conflict and vulnerability. Cyberattacks can disrupt critical infrastructure, sabotage communication networks, and undermine the integrity of information systems, exerting significant influence on military operations and geopolitical stability. Similarly, the integration of AIinto autonomous weapon systems enables enhanced decision-making, adaptive tactics, and predictive analysis, augmenting the effectiveness and lethality of militaryforces while raising ethical and legal concerns regarding the autonomy and accountability of such systems.In conclusion, the advent of next-generation weapons heralds a new era of warfare characterized by unprecedented capabilities, complexities, and challenges. From drones and directed energy weapons to hypersonic missiles and AI-driven systems, these technological innovations are poisedto reshape the strategic landscape and redefine the natureof conflict. As military forces adapt to these advancements, it becomes imperative to navigate the ethical, legal, and strategic implications of deploying such technologies in an increasingly interconnected and contested world. Only through careful consideration and responsible stewardship can we harness the potential of next-generation weapons to promote peace, security, and stability in the 21st century and beyond.。

雅思阅读14test1大作文

雅思阅读14test1大作文

雅思阅读14test1大作文The topic of the IELTS reading passage 14 test 1 revolves around thehistorical development and impact of technology on human society. As technology continues to advance at an unprecedented rate, it has become increasingly intertwined with various aspects of our lives, influencing the way we communicate, work, and interact with the world around us. In this essay, we will delve into the historical background of technological development, analyze different perspectives on its impact, provide case studies and examples to illustrate key points, critically evaluate the benefits and drawbacks, and conclude with future implications and recommendations.The historical development of technology can be traced back to the early innovations of ancient civilizations, such as the invention of the wheel and the discovery of fire. Over time, technological advancements have significantly transformed human society, from the industrial revolution to the digital age. The rapid pace of technological innovation has led to the creation of new industries, improved standards of living, and enhanced global connectivity. However, it has also raised concerns about job displacement, privacy issues, and environmental sustainability.From a positive perspective, technology has revolutionized various industries, such as healthcare, transportation, and communication. Medical technologies have enabled the development of life-saving treatments and improved patient care. In the transportation sector, advancements in electric and autonomous vehicles have the potential to reduce carbon emissions and enhance road safety. Additionally, the widespread adoption of digital communication tools has facilitated global connectivity and collaboration, breaking down geographical barriers and fostering cultural exchange.On the other hand, there are also negative implications associated with the pervasive use of technology. The rise of automation and artificial intelligence has raised concerns about job displacement and the future of work. As machinesbecome increasingly capable of performing tasks traditionally carried out by humans, there is a growing need to reevaluate the skills required in the workforce and provide adequate training and support for those at risk of being displaced. Furthermore, the proliferation of social media and online platforms has given rise to issues related to privacy, cyberbullying, and misinformation, leading to a growing sense of digital fatigue and disconnection.To illustrate the impact of technology, we can look at the case study of the smartphone and its influence on modern society. The introduction of smartphones has revolutionized the way we communicate, access information, and conduct business. However, it has also led to concerns about addiction, mental health issues, and the erosion of face-to-face interactions. The constant connectivity afforded by smartphones has blurred the boundaries between work and personal life, leading to a sense of always being 'on' and contributing to stress and burnout.In evaluating the benefits and drawbacks of technology, it is important to consider the ethical and social implications of its widespread adoption. While technological advancements have the potential to improve efficiency, convenience, and access to information, they also raise questions about the equitable distribution of benefits and the preservation of human values and relationships. As we continue to embrace new technologies, it is essential to strike a balance between innovation and the preservation of our humanity.Looking ahead, it is crucial to consider the future implications of technological development and make recommendations for its responsible use. As we navigate the complexities of the digital age, it is important to prioritizeethical considerations, promote digital literacy, and foster a culture of responsible innovation. By embracing a human-centered approach to technology, we can harness its potential for positive change while mitigating its negative consequences.In conclusion, the historical development and impact of technology on human society have been profound and multifaceted. While technological advancements havebrought about significant improvements in various aspects of our lives, they have also given rise to complex challenges that require careful consideration and proactive solutions. By critically evaluating the benefits and drawbacks of technology and offering recommendations for its responsible use, we can pave the way for a future that harnesses the potential of technology while preserving our humanity.。

信息系统项目管理师-PMI词典英文专业术语

信息系统项目管理师-PMI词典英文专业术语

PMI Lexicon of ProjectManagement TermsThe PMI Lexicon of Project Management Terms offers you a standardized set of frequently used project, program and portfolio management terms with clear and concise definitions. Included are 145 terms that have a unique use in the profession and high relevance to its vocabulary. While our Combined Standards Glossary© contained all of the definitions from PMI's global standards, in some instances the definitions differed from standard to standard. The lexicon is the first step toward a consistent…Acceptance CriteriaA set of conditions that is required to be met before deliverables are accepted.ActivityA distinct, scheduled portion of work performed during the course of a project.Actual CostThe realized cost incurred for the work performed on an activity during a specific time period.Analogous EstimatingA technique for estimating the duration or cost of an activity or a project, using historical data from a similar activity or project.Apportioned EffortAn activity where effort is allotted proportionately across certain discrete efforts and not divisible into discrete efforts. (Note: Apportioned effort is one of three earned value management [EVM] types of activities used to measure work performance.)AssumptionA factor in the planning process that is considered to be true, real, or certain, without proof or demonstration.Backward PassA critical path method technique for calculating the late start and late finish dates by working backward through the schedule model from the project end date.BaselineThe approved version of a work product that can be changed only through formal change control procedures and is used as a basis for comparison.Bottom-up EstimatingA method of estimating project duration or cost by aggregating the estimates of the lower-level components of the work breakdown structure (WBS).Budget at CompletionThe sum of all budgets established for the work to be performed.Change ControlA process whereby modifications to documents, deliverables, or baselines associated with the project are identified, documented, approved, or rejected.Change Control BoardA formally chartered group responsible for reviewing, evaluating, approving, delaying, or rejecting changes to the project and for recording and communicating such decisions.Change Control SystemA set of procedures that describes how modifications to the project deliverables and documentation are managed and controlled.Change RequestA formal proposal to modify any document, deliverable, or baseline.Code of AccountsA numbering system used to uniquely identify each component of the work breakdown structure.Communication Management PlanA component of the project, program, or portfolio management plan that describes how, when, and by whom information will be administered and disseminated.ConstraintA limiting factor that affects the execution of a project, program, portfolio, or process.Control AccountA management control point where scope, budget, actual cost, andschedule are integrated and compared to earned value for performance measurement.Corrective ActionAn intentional activity that realigns the performance of the project work with the project management plan.Cost Management PlanA component of a project or program management plan that describes how costs will be planned, structured, and controlled.Cost Performance IndexA measure of the cost efficiency of budgeted resources expressed as the ratio of earned value to actual cost.Cost VarianceThe amount of budget deficit or surplus at a given point in time, expressed as the difference between the earned value and the actual cost.CrashingA technique used to shorten the schedule duration for the least incremental cost by adding resources.Critical Chain MethodA schedule method that allows the project team to place buffers on any project schedule path to account for limited resources andproject uncertainties.Critical PathThe sequence of activities that represents the longest path through a project, which determines the shortest possible duration.Critical Path ActivityAny activity on the critical path in a project schedule.Critical Path MethodA method used to estimate the minimum project duration and determine the amount of scheduling flexibility on the logical network paths within the schedule model.Data DateA point in time when the status of the project is recorded.Decision Tree AnalysisA diagramming and calculation technique for evaluating the implications of a chain of multiple options in the presence of uncertainty.DecompositionA technique used for dividing and sub-dividing the project scope and project deliverables into smaller, more manageable parts.Defect RepairAn intentional activity to modify a nonconforming product or product component.DeliverableAny unique and verifiable product, result, or capability to perform a service that is required to be produced to complete a process, phase, or project.Discrete EffortAn activity that can be planned and measured and that yields a specific output. (Note: Discrete effort is one of three earned value management [EVM] types of activities used to measure work performance.)Early Finish DateIn the critical path method, the earliest possible point in time when the uncompleted portions of a schedule activity can finish based on the schedule network logic, the data date, and any schedule constraints.Early Start DateIn the critical path method, the earliest possible point in time when the uncompleted portions of a schedule activity can start based on the schedule network logic, the data date, and any schedule constraints.Earned ValueThe measure of work performed expressed in terms of the budget authorized for that work.Earned Value ManagementA methodology that combines scope, schedule, and resource measurements to assess project performance and progress.EffortThe number of labor units required to complete a schedule activity or work breakdown structure component, often expressed in hours, days, or weeks.Enterprise Environmental FactorsConditions, not under the immediate control of the team, that influence, constrain, or direct the project, program, or portfolio.Estimate at CompletionThe expected total cost of completing all work expressed as the sum of the actual cost to date and the estimate to complete.Estimate to CompleteThe expected cost to finish all the remaining project work.Fast TrackingA schedule compression technique in which activities or phases normally done in sequence are performed in parallel for at least a portion of their duration.Finish-to-FinishA logical relationship in which a successor activity cannot finish until a predecessor activity has finished.Finish-to-StartA logical relationship in which a successor activity cannot start until a predecessor activity has finished.Forward PassA critical path method technique for calculating the early start and early finish dates by working forward through the schedule model from the project start date or a given point in time.Free FloatThe amount of time that a schedule activity can be delayed without delaying the early start date of any successor or violating a schedule constraint.Gantt ChartA bar chart of schedule information where activities are listed on the vertical axis, dates are shown on the horizontal axis, andactivity durations are shown as horizontal bars placed according to start and finish dates.Human Resource PlanA component of the project or program management plan that describes how the roles and responsibilities, reporting relationships, and staff management will be addressed and structured.LagThe amount of time whereby a successor activity is required to be delayed with respect to a predecessor activity.Late Finish DateIn the critical path method, the latest possible point in time when the uncompleted portions of a schedule activity can finish based on the schedule network logic, the project completion date, and any schedule constraints.Late Start DateIn the critical path method, the latest possible point in time when the uncompleted portions of a schedule activity can start based on the schedule network logic, the project completion date, and any schedule constraints.LeadThe amount of time whereby a successor activity can be advanced with respect to a predecessor activity.Lessons LearnedThe knowledge gained during a project which shows how project events were addressed or should be addressed in the future for the purpose of improving future performanceLevel of EffortAn activity that does not produce definitive end products and is measured by the passage of time. (Note: Level of effort is one of three earned value management [EVM] types of activities used to measure work performance.)Logical RelationshipA dependency between two activities, or between an activity and a milestone.MilestoneA significant point or event in a project, program, or portfolio.Most Likely DurationAn estimate of the most probable activity duration that takes into account all of the known variables that could affect performance.OpportunityA risk that would have a positive effect on one or more project objectives.Optimistic DurationAn estimate of the shortest activity duration that takes into account all of the known variables that could affect performance.Organizational Breakdown StructureA hierarchical representation of the project organization, which illustrates the relationship between project activities and the organizational units that will perform those activities.Organizational Process AssetsPlans, processes, policies, procedures and knowledge bases specific to and used by the performing organization.Organizational Project Management MaturityThe level of an organization's ability to deliver the desired strategic outcomes in a predictable, controllable, and reliable manner.Parametric EstimatingAn estimating technique in which an algorithm is used to calculate cost or duration based on historical data and project parameters.Path ConvergenceA relationship in which a schedule activity has more than one predecessor.Path DivergenceA relationship in which a schedule activity has more than one successor.Percent CompleteAn estimate expressed as a percent of the amount of work that has been completed on an activity or a work breakdown structure component.Performing OrganizationAn enterprise whose personnel are the most directly involved in doing the work of the project or program.Pessimistic DurationAn estimate of the longest activity duration, which takes into account all of the known variables that could affect performance.Phase GateA review at the end of a phase in which a decision is made to continue to the next phase, to continue with modification, or to end a project or program.Planned ValueThe authorized budget assigned to scheduled work.PortfolioProjects, programs, subportfolios, and operations managed as a group to achieve strategic objectives.Portfolio BalancingThe process of optimizing the mix of portfolio components to further the strategic objectives of the organization.Portfolio ManagementThe centralized management of one or more portfolios to achieve strategic objectives.Precedence Diagramming MethodA technique used for constructing a schedule model in whichactivities are represented by nodes and are graphically linked by one or more logical relationships to show the sequence in which the activities are to be performed.Predecessor ActivityAn activity that logically comes before a dependent activity in a schedule.Preventive ActionAn intentional activity that ensures the future performance of the project work is aligned with the project management plan.Probability and Impact MatrixA grid for mapping the probability of each risk occurrence and its impact on project objectives if that risk occurs.Procurement Management PlanA component of the project or program management plan that describes how a team will acquire goods and services from outside of the performing organization.Product Life CycleThe series of phases that represent the evolution of a product, from concept through delivery, growth, maturity, and to retirement.ProgramA group of related projects, subprograms and program activities that are managed in a coordinated way to obtain benefits not available from managing them individually.Program ManagementThe application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to a program to meet the program requirements and to obtain benefits and control not available by managing projects individually.Program Management OfficeA management structure that standardizes the program-related governance processes and facilitates the sharing of resources, methodologies, tools, and techniques.Progressive ElaborationThe iterative process of increasing the level of detail in a project management plan as greater amounts of information and more accurate estimates become available.ProjectA temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique product, service, or result.Project CalendarA calendar that identifies working days and shifts that are available for scheduled activities.Project CharterA document issued by the project initiator or sponsor that formally authorizes the existence of a project and provides the project manager with the authority to apply organizational resources to project activities.Project Life CycleThe series of phases that a project passes through from itsinitiation to its closure.Project ManagementThe application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet the project requirements.Project Management OfficeA management structure that standardizes the project-related governance processes and facilitates the sharing of resources, methodologies, tools, and techniques.Project Management PlanThe document that describes how the project will be executed, monitored, and controlled.Project ManagerThe person assigned by the performing organization to lead the team that is responsible for achieving the project objectives.Project PhaseA collection of logically related project activities that culminates in the completion of one or more deliverables.Project ScheduleAn output of a schedule model that presents linked activities with planned dates, durations, milestones, and resources.Project Schedule Network DiagramA graphical representation of the logical relationships among the project schedule activities.Project ScopeThe work performed to deliver a product, service, or result with the specified features and functions.Project Scope StatementThe description of the project scope, major deliverables, assumptions, and constraints.Quality Management PlanA component of the project or program management plan that describes how an organization's quality policies will be implemented.RequirementA condition or capability that is required to be present in a product, service, or result to satisfy a contract or other formally imposed specification.Requirements Management PlanA component of the project or program management plan that describes how requirements will be analyzed, documented and managed.Requirements Traceability MatrixA grid that links product requirements from their origin to the deliverables that satisfy them.Resource Breakdown StructureA hierarchical representation of resources by category and type.Resource CalendarA calendar that identifies the working days and shifts upon which each specific resource is available.Resource LevelingA technique in which start and finish dates are adjusted based on resource constraints with the goal of balancing demand for resources with the available supply.Responsibility Assignment MatrixA grid that shows the project resources assigned to each work package.RiskAn uncertain event or condition that, if it occurs, has a positive or negative effect on one or more project objectives.Risk AcceptanceA risk response strategy whereby the project team decides to acknowledge the risk and not take any action unless the risk occurs.Risk AvoidanceA risk response strategy whereby the project team acts to eliminate the threat or protect the project from its impact.Risk Breakdown StructureA hierarchical representation of risks that is organized according to risk categories.Risk CategoryA group of potential causes of risk.Risk Management PlanA component of the project, program, or portfolio management plan that describes how risk management activities will be structured and performed.Risk MitigationA risk response strategy whereby the project team acts to reduce the probability of occurrence or impact of a risk.Risk RegisterA document in which the results of risk analysis and risk response planning are recorded.Risk TransferenceA risk response strategy whereby the project team shifts the impact of a threat to a third party, together with ownership of the response.Rolling Wave PlanningAn iterative planning technique in which the work to be accomplished in the near term is planned in detail, while the work in the future is planned at a higher level.Schedule BaselineThe approved version of a schedule model that can be changed only through formal change control procedures and is used as a basis for comparison to actual results.Schedule CompressionA technique used to shorten the schedule duration without reducing the project scope.Schedule Management PlanA component of the project or program management plan that establishes the activities for developing, monitoring, and controlling the project or program.Schedule ModelA representation of the plan for executing the project's activities including durations, dependencies and other planning information, used to produce a project schedule along with other scheduling artifacts.Schedule Model AnalysisA process used to investigate or analyze the output of the schedule model in order to optimize the scheduleSchedule Performance IndexA measure of schedule efficiency expressed as the ratio of earned value to planned value.Schedule VarianceA measure of schedule performance expressed as the difference between the earned value and the planned value.Scope BaselineThe approved version of a scope statement, work breakdown structure (WBS), and its associated WBS dictionary, which can be changed only through formal change control procedures and is used as a basis for comparison.Scope CreepThe uncontrolled expansion to product or project scope without adjustments to time, cost, and resources.Scope Management PlanA component of the project or program management plan that describes how the scope will be defined, developed, monitored, controlled, and verified.S-Curve AnalysisAn earned value management technique used to indicate performance trends by using a graph that displays cumulative costs over aspecific time period.Secondary RiskA risk that arises as a direct result of implementing a risk response.SponsorA person or group who provides resources and support for the project, program, or portfolio, and is accountable for enabling success.Staffing Management PlanA component of the human resource plan that describes when and how team members will be acquired and how long they will be needed.StakeholderAn individual, group, or organization who may affect, be affected by, or perceive itself to be affected by a decision, activity, or outcome of a project, program, or portfolio.Start-to-FinishA logical relationship in which a successor activity cannot finish until a predecessor activity has started.Start-to-StartA logical relationship in which a successor activity cannot start until a predecessor activity has started.Successor ActivityA dependent activity that logically comes after another activity in a schedule.Summary ActivityA group of related schedule activities aggregated and displayed as a single activity.ThreatA risk that would have a negative effect on one or more project objectives.Three-Point EstimateA technique used to estimate cost or duration by applying an average of optimistic, pessimistic, and most likely estimates when there is uncertainty with the individual activity estimates.To-Complete Performance IndexA measure of the cost performance that is required to be achieved with the remaining resources in order to meet a specified management goal, expressed as the ratio of the cost to finish the outstanding work to the remaining budget.Total FloatThe amount of time that a schedule activity can be delayed or extended from its early start date without delaying the projectfinish date or violating a schedule constraint.Trigger ConditionAn event or situation that indicates that a risk is about to occur.Variance AnalysisA technique for determining the cause and degree of difference between the baseline and actual performance.Variance at CompletionA projection of the amount of budget deficit or surplus, expressed as the difference between the budget at completion and the estimate at completion.WBS DictionaryA document that provides detailed deliverable, activity, and scheduling information about each component in the work breakdown structure.What-If Scenario AnalysisThe process of evaluating scenarios in order to predict their effect on project objectives.Work Breakdown StructureA hierarchical decomposition of the total scope of work to be carried out by the project team to accomplish the project objectives and create the required deliverables.Work PackageThe work defined at the lowest level of the work breakdown structure for which cost and duration can be estimated and managed.WorkaroundA response to a threat that has occurred, for which a prior response had not been planned or was not effective.。