Teradyne's Traditional Project Execution Strategy In The Jaguar Project

The Jaguar project, which was a project undertaken by Teradyne Corporation, the World’s largest supplier of equipment for testing semiconductors. The aim of the project was to develop a highly flexible tester platform that could be easily adjusted to the needs of different device segments. It was a critical project that will determine the ability and success of Teradyne to compete in the market, especially that the market need was drastically shifting towards flexible tester platforms rather than different specific test systems for each type of semiconductor device.

Compare and contrast Teradyne’s traditional project execution strategy to the approach it used in Jaguar? What was similar? What was different?

Strategy Traditional Project
Some team members believed in the value of project tools while others saw them as a distraction from the work. People were afraid of the tools as they forced a commitment to milestones. As such, people might be spending more time managing the metric rather than the project. Certain behaviors were not changed even though the tools were used. Specifically, the software team was in denial with their schedule. The management team did not pay enough attention to the data as a result of skepticism around the metric. The team did not respond to the data which indicated a delay in schedule through the earned value tool. Some members allowed the data to lie to them. As a result, the software component of the program was behind schedule. The software challenge faced on the Jaguar program extended beyond the program itself. The volume production for Ultra Flex system, a separate program from Jaguar, was pushed out six months as a result of delay in getting the software online.

Unintended consequences of using the project management tools
Some of the metric were not understood by the management teams and they choose to use the metrics which was easier and understandable for them. This did not reflect on the correct project status more development resource were wasted due to the training, tracking and status update meeting
 Employees and development teams did not feel that it is their responsibility for project delivery and expected higher management to govern.
 The need to update status and maintain the project management tools created a diversion for the development teams from the real