. "4 The Vital Role of Program/Project Management and Systems Engineering at NASA." Building a Better NASA Workforce: Meeting the Workforce Needs for the National Vision for Space Exploration. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2007.
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Building a Better NASA Workforce: Meeting the Workforce Needs for the National Vision for Space Exploration
BOX 4.1
Common Factors Contributing to the Success or Failure of NASA Programs
Factors contributing to program failures or significant cost growth (from investigations)
Inadequate requirements management
Convoluted board/panel processes
Poor systems engineering processes
Inadequate reviews/oversight
Inadequate heritage design analyses in early phases
Inadequate systems engineering and integration expertise
Inadequate testing/interpretation of test data
Inadequate systems-level risk management
Contributing factors associated with successful programs (from organizational literature)
Rigorous requirements management
Rigorous interface control/streamlined boards and panels
Rigorous systems engineering processes/reviews
Strong government/contractor teaming
Experienced personnel
Thorough testing
Systems level approach throughout program levels
Rigorous risk management
SOURCE: Adapted from NASA, Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation, Systems Engineering andInstitutional Transitions Study, Final Report, April 5, 2006.
In considering whether NASA also faces a requirement for highly skilled systems engineering and program/ project management personnel in its robotic spaceflight program, the committee found that a steady succession of robotic programs has provided opportunities for sustaining a base of expertise in NASA and industry in robotic spaceflight. Nevertheless, given the concerns it heard expressed within NASA, academia, and industry about the amount of experience within the program/project management and systems engineering base in the robotic spaceflight program, the committee concluded that these concerns apply to both the human spacecraft and the robotic spaceflight programs at NASA.6
The committee struggled with the question of whether the requirement for 250-350 highly skilled program/ project managers and systems and integration engineers in the short term constituted a shortfall in NASA’s workforce. The problem for the committee was that the numbers presented by NASA in its Workforce Strategy did not indicate the amount of experience desired by the agency for each of the positions.
INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
To gain a perspective on this issue, the committee sought input from an industry consortium. A sampling of representatives of 25 member companies of the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) expressed specific concerns regarding NASA’s systems engineering and program management experience, the fact that many NASA engineers
6
For example, the 2006 NRC report Assessment of Balance in NASA’s Science Programs (The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.) made a major point about problems with program execution in NASA’s Science Mission Directorate and attributed these problems, in part, to the adequacy of staff.
