Industrial Technologist’s Toolkit For Technical Management (ITTTM) Introduction, Process, Communication Overview 1.ITTTM Toolkits, CD courseware context 2.Courseware, courses, toolkits, portfolios 3.Courseware application portfolio template Dr. John W. Sinn, Professor, Bowling Green State University

ITTTM Toolkits, CD Courseware Context Seven sets define, overview 42 tool courseware system:  Primer: overviews system, core knowledge, start point  Cultural: broad change, leadership, transformation  Data: six sigma problem solving, decision-making  Documentation: problem solving, kaizen, lean, ISO  Service: data, documentation in service functions  Synchronous: product launch, robust analysis, capstone  Communications: information management  Manufacturing and non-manufacturing, e-commerce  Digital, MS Word, CD format, based on Office Suite  Each set facilitates, guides team work electronically  Designed for online communication, optimum flexibility  Focused on building portfolio, doing a team-based project

Documentation Tools, Lean Data Tools, Six Sigma Service, Tools Manufacturing, Non- Manufacturing Synchronous Tools, New Product Development Project Team Cultural Change And Continuous Improvement Information Analysis, Communication Systems Applied Research, Project Structure Enhanced Problem Solving, Decision Making Internal, External, E- commerce Relationships Quality Management Systems(QMS) International Standards Organization (ISO) Professional Outcomes, Growth, Knowledge Technological Infrastructure Industrial Technologists’ Toolkit For Technical Management ITTTM Toolkits, CD Courseware Context

1. Student Teams Form, In Discussion Board 2. Review Information, Identify Project, Chat 3. Analyze Key Parts In Tools, RCA And SDA’s 4. Team All Contribute, Build Startup Portfolio 5. Faculty Assesses Portfolio, All Chat, Review 6. Teams Use Feedback To Improve, Do First Tool Startup is a base for doing toolkits, portfolio, course…….. Courseware, Courses, Toolkits, Portfolios Startup completion raises early questions, answers, leads into a base for doing first toolkit, expanded portfolio……..

Startup in courses, courseware parallels, facilitates:  Startup information collection, review, analysis  Project definition, portfolio structure, team culture  Explanation of courseware, introduction  Initial use of systems for course, how to communicate  Leading into building, compiling a portfolio After startup, courseware facilitates course, portfolio:  Portfolio team oriented, individual also identified clearly  Portfolio shows knowledge growth, project deliverables  Courseware, assessment oriented, iterative improvement  Courseware, disciplined quality system infrastructure  Portfolio has structure from courseware to guide  Each tool, done as key assignment, evolves portfolio Courseware, Courses, Toolkits, Portfolios

1. Tool Work Individually, Completed Like Startup 2. All Work Posted In Blackboard, Managed 3. Threads Organize RCA And SDA Posting 4. All Posts Compiled By Team, Build Portfolio 5. Faculty POAM Feedback Used In Chat 6. Iteratively Repeat Six Tools, Grow Project Portfolio development, assessment, six tools………starts with first tool completion, based on successful startup Courseware, Courses, Toolkits, Portfolios

1. SDA’s Are Targeted To Each Tool Content 2. RCA’s Are Built On, Grown With Each Tool 3. Both Grow Knowledge, Assess To Improve 4. Analyze, Synthesize, Information, Apply Project 5. Raise Questions, Research On Project 6. Assess Project, Document As Portfolio RCA, SDA forms are courseware, research structure…… built in, around application portfolio template Courseware Application Portfolio Template

Technical project, methodology, applied research  Facilitates team project focus, hands-on, reality based  Problem solving, technical management, research methods  Portfolio assessment documents continuous improvement  Questions raised in SDA’s, RCA’s cause team to “dig in”  Courseware is research methodology, reflection, assessment Tools, as courseware, conclude with applications:  Applications merge tool content, project experiences  Applications are synthesis, interpretation, reflection  Requiring, doing team communication, management  Table format “collects” team data and documentation  Assessed by others, compile based on each others’ work  Portfolio emerges as assessed improvement, best practice Courseware Application Portfolio Template

SDA’s and RCA’s have several features, many in common:  Both allow interaction, teams grow portfolio, knowledge  Both facilitate individual responses by each researcher  What and when each researcher contributed, documented  Both compiled by team member as grand form in portfolio  Both guide, have multiple areas to be filled in, detailed  Both require analysis, reflection, writing by all to improve  RCA’s recycled, each tool, reflecting growth  SDA’s focus tool progress, new technical concepts RCA’s and SDA’s are the heart of the courseware……… Courseware Application Portfolio Template

Three RCA’s are continuously done, iteratively, by team with SDA completion as part of each tool to improve portfolio:  Project Portfolio Assessment, Research Methodology, Plan (PPARMP). A research plan, evolved over time, based on findings, analyses, conclusions, recommendations by team.  Review Of Literature, Documentation Assessment (ROLDA) Abstracts of course content, related external information researched, developed around project solution.  Portfolio Presentation Management Team Assessment (PPMTA). Internal, external performance reviews by team. Each is explained, detailed in the next several slides…….. Courseware Application Portfolio Template

PPARMP is a planning and organization system…….. Part of the broader portfolio template, courseware When forms due, by all on team—all, independently Done by team leadership, rotating to all Threads set up concurrently in forum, all post Project information contributed by all over time PROJECT PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT, RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, PLAN (PPARMP) RCA General Use/Application (done by Team Leadership—note that team leaders rotate continuously just like all other team functions): Part 1 A, B, C, D. Team leaders assign independent and grand form team members RCA and SDA compilation responsibilities, due dates. Part 2 A, B, C, D. Continuously evolve “Project” information, and diagrams, to help explain and connect all aspects of team work. Part 3. FACR—RCA is updated and addressed with each tool/phase based on FACR’s done at specific SDA’s. Part 4. General methodological reflection, based on total completed portfolio, and input from all, to assist all in improving. PART 1. Team leaders prepare threads in discussion board work areas for this tool, where all work can be posted as assigned. All persons on the team should be shown on a line below, given an assignment, corresponding to work posts in discussion board threads. Phase:Tool:Date:Compiler (s), Team Leader:Team: Researcher1A. Assigned Forms Due, First Half Posting Cycle 1B. Researcher Independent Work Reviewed By 1C. Grand Form Compiled, Second Half Posting Cycle1D. Final Compiled Work Reviewed By Example Joe Smith John Doe10/8/03James Hale PART 2. This section should be expanded and evolved to address and develop parts 2 A, B, C, and D over time to become several pages in length and assist non-team participants (as well as team participants) in understanding the project focus and context. 2 A. Project Background: (ex, number/type persons in systems, recent changes, historical of systems/processes, product information, etc.) 2 B. Project Problem Statement: (ex. how are systems organized and managed to obtain the full benefit of collaborative communication.) 2 C. Project Objectives: (three to maximum six, perhaps provided by customer/consultation with others, continuously refined). 2 D. Project Research Methodology: (how data is gathered, analyzed with SDA’s/RCA’s. Teams do a modified Gantt chart like those below). Part 2 includes three diagrams as follow, all designed to graphically help describe how the project is being done, also continuously evolved.

Courseware Application Portfolio Template PPARMP systematically integrates FACR, tool rollout Part of broader portfolio template, courseware Relates to method of work, what is found in SDA’s All contribute at integrated FACR format, PPARMP Compilers collect summaries, from threads in forum Part 4 A, Tool/SDA Project Methodology, Rollout: Tool/SDA methodology is a planned completion of tools and SDA’s in course and project with each tool and phase portfolio. Relationships to FACR, and tool/phase methodologies are updated with each portfolio, coinciding with rollout of work shown in course syllabus. Final phase II portfolio presentation has 18 tools completed, minimum. SDA 1 and 2 are enhanced ongoing throughout course; SDA 3, 4 and 5 are done as shown below; and other SDA’s may be modified per team methodology (ex: up to two SDA’s used in 3, 4, 5 can be repeated and “grown” and other SDA’s may be used from a different set of tools within the total 42 ITTTM). Are any changes recommended for the rollout at this time, and if yes, what is the basis for the proposed changes? ToolSDA 1SDA 2SDA 3SDA 4SDA 5Other (s) 1OPCPSOGADSDCISOQSAOPPGOTA 2OPCPSOGAGCABSOPAPEIAR 3OPCPSOGAFMEAGCA (cont)GAIS 4OPCPSOGAGBAPSMMPLCAAPASPC 5OPCPSOGAFMEA (cont)MAPAPASPC (cont) 6OPCPSOGAMTAGCA (cont)GSICPC Researcher3A. Project objective (s) written…… 3B. Findings, analyses observed as data, documentation in SDA…… 3C. Conclusions, recommendations in methods, course outcomes…… 3D. TRIRPA, TPPMA, PPDPOA relationships? Researcher Contribution Collect From All, Compile Part 3 A, B, C, and D. Findings, Analysis, Conclusions, Recommendations (FACR-PMP) RCA. As each SDA is used and a FACR done for each, the general results and findings from all persons on the team are brought together as general project findings, analyses, conclusions and recommendations for future planning and work. All work should be organized around objectives in project.

Courseware Application Portfolio Template PPARMP brings all parts of portfolio template together Methodology of work, doing tool applications, phases All integrate work to build portfolio, research project Part 4 B, Tool Portfolio Methodology Rollout. Tool portfolio completion in two week posting cycle combines tasks, who should do, and when to complete in relation to all other work. Three tool portfolios are done before phase I and three after, all leading to final phase II compilation (both phases result in a “grand” accumulative portfolio, explained in the next chart). Posting cycle includes all days, and can be done ahead of time. *Astericked tasks are first done by team leader or assistant team leader on a rotating basis, and all coincide with rollout of work in syllabus. Timeline in Days/Weeks/Months (denoted by color) Task/Action/Step Faculty prepares tool discussion board areaX Team leadership prepares PPARMP, assigns work*X Team leadership prepares threads in work area*X SDA’s researched by all, all do all SDA’sXXX SDA’s independently posted at threads by allXXXX Non-required team chat about work in motionXXX SDA’s compiled by team members per PPARMPXXXXXX RCA’s independently posted at threads by allXXXXXX RCA’s compiled by team members per PPARMPXXXXXX Tool portfolio assembled by team leadership*XX Tool portfolio reviewed by all on teamXX Tool portfolio posted by team leadership*X Faculty assessment, post in new discussion boardXX Required team chat about POAM, next toolXX

Courseware Application Portfolio Template ROLDA, systematic tool to abstract, analyze content Summarizes course content, analyzes for all Relates externally researched information to SDA’s All contribute via independent form, post in forum Compilers collect summaries, from threads in forum Review Of Literature, Documentation Assessment (ROLDA) RCA General Use/Application (top part): Read tool long and short forms from ITTTM and provide general tool bibliographic information and word abstract of the tool in appropriate areas below NOTE: all must do this individually, one on team compiles all work posted). 1. Response 1A, give the main technological concept of the tool. 2. Response 2A, explain how the tool added value to the team project. 3. Response 3A, form a question pertaining to the tool for chat discussion. General Use/Application (bottom part): Identify an article/source related to the tool, and summarize in words (abstract). 4. Response 1B, give the bibliographic source, being careful to cite all details correctly. 5. Response 2B, explain how this article added value to the team project. 6. Response 3B, SDA connection to the article—usually one or two, minimum. Phase:Tool:Date:Researcher:Compiler (s):Team: Information Source (Tool reviewed for this toolkit completion) In Bibliographic Form: Abstract And Synthesis Of Key Information (usually approximately words) completed by compiler (s) based on submissions by all on team as well as their own review of the tool content: Researcher1A. Main Technological Concept: 2A. Relationship, Value Added, To Project/:3A. Assessment Question, Pros And Cons, For Chat: Researcher Contribution Collect From All, Compile Compiler Portfolio Reflections, Summary Of Technical Work, Assessment, Based On Individual Researcher Inputs: Compiler Reflections To Help Improve Quality Of Work In Portfolio Based On All Individual Researcher Inputs: Article Abstract Of Key Information (usually approximately words—each tool submission requires one for each team member) : Researcher1B. Bibliographic Source: Author; How To Access; How/Who, Published; Type Source, etc.: 2B. Why Is This Source Relevant; How Does It Add Value (Reflections By Researcher)? 3B. SDA’s Connected: Researcher Contribution

Team names for internal assessment. External uses other teams’ names Compiler organizes excel rating forms, in PPMTA collective “grand” form All researchers rate others on separate excel forms and post individual PPMTA RCA work Various characteristics are described to help assess each persons’ work in the PPMTA Courseware Application Portfolio Template

Characteristics of ITTTM courseware, electronic courses, demonstrate, provide much to do with communication. Relationships, inherent, are basis for knowledge growth.  ITTTM process and content intertwine as learning  Interdisciplinary relationships as base, foundation  Data and documentation, quality system applications  Problem solving, decision-making  Change, assessment, improvement systems  Technical project management drives communication  Team functions, communication systems  Communication systems merging with quality systems ITTTM Courseware, Communication, Systems

Characteristics of ITTTM courseware……...  Designed for communication, building knowledge Table forms require writing, response, analysis, assessment Data, information documented by each researcher in early post Synthesis, articulation done by all, final portfolio compilation  Technical project management, team discipline Team functions require effective communication systems Problem solving, decision-making, all done within ITTTM Communication systems merge quality system, documentation ITTTM Courseware, Communication, Systems  How do we assess, evaluate performance? How do we assess e-projects, based on documented deliverables? Review, assess work? Supervise, empower, delegate, assign?  How does e-team behavior play into assessment? Assess those we do not see, objectively use data, documentation? How to organize, manage teams, projects? Do supply chain……

General infrastructure is critical to good communication:  All on same page, hardware and software? PC equipment functionalities similar, compatible? Windows driven, MS Word software base, Office suite……..  Assessing general infrastructure performance………. Objectivity in data and documentation, based on ISO 9000 rubric Do customer requests electronically………not on site? Electronic Infrastructure In Place, Used? Broader shell infrastructure, critical for communication:  Shell places all on same page, hardware, software……. Shell provides key part of security in total systems Maintenance, support in place to keep all growing, moving?  Blackboard as shell………. Can do e-team mobility, security, data, documentation……… Parallels, provides, many business and industry functionalities

1. Shell As Base For Commun- ication 2. Same Hardware And Software Capabilities 3.e-teams, In Place, Main Drivers 4. Review, Assessment, Systems Documented 5. Systems Define And Manage Culture 6. Portfolio Demonstrates Objectivity, Deliverables Infrastructural flow and relationships……… Electronic Infrastructure In Place, Used?

 Blackboard shell is non-traditional classroom……… Announcements, updated routinely, address progress, issues Course information posted for all, as needed, continuous Shell is where team defines culture, communicates Automatic attendance taken based on presence, lack of Highly flexible, structured, organized—requires communication Requirements, functions require discipline, concentration Student is empowered, requires initiative, time commitment  Chat is where, when, all gather for simultaneous work Team dialogue, problem solving, decision making, project review Chats record “meeting” minutes, archived team growth, same time  Discussion board is for focused postings, organization Threading organizes SDA, RCA posts, evolves knowledge growth Well organized, systematic, reflects management of team

Portfolio is team oriented, research method infrastructure  Iterative knowledge growth, around project deliverables  Courseware is disciplined quality system infrastructure  Portfolio documentation structure from courseware is guide  Each tool, done as assigned, iteratively evolves portfolio  Portfolio demonstrates progress, deliverables, objectively Project Research, Professional Portfolio Electronic course, courseware is applied communication:  Read information, articulate response, others reply, ongoing  Courseware requires reading prior to applying content  Portfolio communicates concepts, project deliverables  Feedback, as assessment closes loop, improves in POAM  All must initiate, read, post and repeat, engage early, often

1. Syllabus Identifies Outcomes, Content 2. Content Leads To Rubrics, Metrics 3. Learning Activity Defined As Matrix 4. Syllabus Matrix Blend Assessment, Courseware 5. Matrix In Syllabus Guides Portfolio 6. Content Synthesis, Feedback, Portfolio ITTTM courseware is course level assessment vehicle, via syllabus, statement of anticipated student outcomes Project Research, Professional Portfolio

Outcomes drive assessment, as deliverables, for example: 1.Communication. ”Good communication practices are reflected in all work, ultimately as team portfolio. 2. Review of literature..Literature, information reviewed and extracted supports, grows ideas, knowledge. 3.Content applications. Organize, apply document knowledge via course content as solutions to project. 4.Research methodology. A structured, intentional research plan is designed and implemented. 5.Project management. Resources are well managed to make effective decisions, improve professional practice. Project Research, Professional Portfolio Course outcomes are further defined in the POAM, a matrix assessment system embedded in the syllabus.

QS 327: PORTFOLIO OUTCOME ASSESSMENT MATRIX (POAM) POAM is instructor feedback of posting cycle work by individuals, and total team, integrating outcomes with courseware use, particularly SDA’s and RCA’s tool applications. POAM shows overall portfolio team performance, given at early and second postings. General issue area (GIA) checks, persons astericked in scorecard, and final score are indications of best practices. Outcome 1: Documentation-based knowledge. Literature, information supports, develops ideas, knowledge of systems, relationships via documentation-based quality systems values reflecting knowledge growth, improvement, change. Outcome, aims general assessment, reflect researcher/compiler/team management in RCA’s, SDA’s, others.GIA o Review, analyze, raise questions about quality systems field focused on project and content, adding value o Quality and quantity of information appropriately connects project, course content, professional preparation, TRIRPA GIA improvement feedback, including persons not fully supporting, total points earned (10/20 possible) as a team in final post: Outcome 2: Global, local quality, technology systems relationships. Student teams do service projects to assess, organize, document knowledge as findings from systematic analysis, structured as data and documentation in tools as solutions to project. Outcome, aims general assessment, reflect researcher/compiler/team management in RCA’s, SDA’s, others.GIA o Cultural issues for development and technology transfer, growth in knowledge from project, beyond o Systems in problem solving and decision-making, adding value in resource management and waste oriented services o Assess ethical and “values oriented” issues engaging “political correctness and diversity”, as questions raised o Researchers grow knowledge, from individual applications done, ultimately compiled as grand form “best practices” o Various data and documentation tools applied as appropriate to quality systems, solving project problems GIA improvement feedback, including persons not fully supporting, total points earned (10/20 possible) as a team in final post: Outcome 3: Portfolioing model documentation-based systems. Resources well managed as documentation system to make effective decisions, improve based on broad systems knowledge, applications, evolving in forum, growing team portfolio. Outcome, aims general assessment, reflect researcher/compiler/team management in RCA’s, SDA’s, others.GIA o PPDPOA shows good management, team focus, responsibilities for work, all rotating in all compiling functions o Building, assessing internal and external supplier evaluation systems of services performed, judging quality, FACR o Portfolio system, including power point, show good management, writing quality, effective electronic communication o Supplier, customer communications, information movement, as “real time” innovation, assessment, adding value o Forms, chats, threads show good team management, responsibilities balanced, doing early posts, compiling, rotating GIA improvement feedback, including persons not fully supporting, total points earned (10/20 possible) as a team in final post: Other general feedback/information for team: Team Assessed:Assessor: JWSWork Assessed:Date:Team Points: Project Research, Professional Portfolio