![Introduction (1 of 2) ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
Similaire à Barley newhouse
Similaire à Barley newhouse (20)
Plus de NASAPMC
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Barley newhouse
- 1. Managing Small Spacecraft Projects: Less Is Not Easier NASA 2012 PM Challenge Bryan Barley NASA HQ/MSFC OCE Marilyn Newhouse CSC- Huntsville
- 12. Acknowledgements
Notes de l'éditeur
- Managing a subsystem, even a science instrument as part of a project) does not prepare one for the realities of managing an independent project
- Start with the team, because ripple effects affect all other issues Inexperience: e.g., FM experience from large mission not necessarily transferable to C/D mission, leading to cost/schedule problems
- Mission Managers, PEs, PSs, Prog. Mgmt, Proj. Mgmt have the same number of reviews, meetings, tag-ups to attend Required NASA reviews and key decision points (KDPs) apply to all missions Size of the “book” may shrink, but so does the team developing the book Preparation for a review is driven by the need for review and iteration Reviews may increase depending on customer requirements (e.g., ESA reviews) and project complexity (layers requiring independent reviews) Weekly and monthly reporting may increase: e.g., Strofio (reports as independent instrument, and as part of SERENA to customer) Review board members are more accustomed to full mission reviews (size of tasks, risk tolerance, reserve posture)
- Don’t fall into the trap of relying on informal communications: - too many factors can interrupt/intercept - easy to lose track of how many weekly tag-ups have been missed due to “emergencies” - turnover causes loss of expert knowledge, decision basis - written decisions help mitigate against language barriers
- Common perception that there “is no time” on a small project to build a schedule Common critical path drivers may not apply…but the critical path still exists and is…critical
- Managers: if we are reporting EVM, does it really cost less? EVM is not required for the smallest NASA projects
- Just saying “class C” or “class D” is not enough… What about heritage? Heritage FSW from a class A mission, but not be at all appropriate for a class D mission… Use GRAIL, LADEE as examples for these
- It is human nature to avoid conflict; don’t Start the discussion early; don’t stop until you have agreement (not necessarily consensus) The first question in any discussion might be..what is the risk? You don’t want to be cancelled because cost overruns result from implicit, undocumented, and unacceptable risk assumptions
- You can’t cut corners