National Aeronautics Space Administration    Using a Systems Engineering Approach    to Develop NASA Engineering Talent   ...
What does NASA’s future hold?2
One Thing is Certain…NASA faces an Engineering Challenge!    Of the 11,216 NASA Engineers, 60% will be eligible to retire ...
The Data to Support the Challenge (2011)  NASA 08xx Series (All Centers)                                                  ...
Looking 10 Years Forward  The year is 2021…  NASA 08xx Series (All Centers)                                               ...
What Does this Data Mean to You?10 years from now, if you are NASA Engineer and are not retired        – GET READY!ARE YOU...
How the NASA Safety Center is Tacklingthe Safety & Mission Assurance ChallengeProject Fundamentals and SMA Engineering Tec...
NASA Safety Center     In 2005, the NASA Safety Center was established in Cleveland, OH     NASA Headquarters Strategic ...
NASA Safety Center (NSC)First and foremost, the NSC is not the NESC or the NSSCThe NSC is comprised of four primary Direct...
SMA and STEPSafety and Mission Assurance Technical Excellence Program (STEP)      Agency’s Professional Development Syste...
STEP’s Overnight Success      In less than 3 years, STEP has become       recognized Agency-wide as the way SMA       tra...
Success ContributorsHow did we accomplish so much so quickly?      Inspiring leadership      Dedicated Civil Servant/Con...
Treat it like a NASA Engineering Challenge / Project     The NASA Systems Engineering Project Lifecycle Model (NPR 7120.5)...
The NASA Engineering Lifecycle ModelFive Primary Phases:     A.   Concept & Technical Development     B.   Preliminary Des...
NASA Safety Center’s STEP as anEngineering Professional Development ModelThat’s exactly what we did for the NASA SMA commu...
We Started with a VisionMy VisionCreate the NASA University for Safety and ultimately become the Harvardand MIT of NASA Sa...
We ConceivedIn Conceiving, we:      Looked at successful technical professional development models      Benchmarked NASA...
Engineering Professional DevelopmentEngineers Council for Professional Development (1979)"Engineering is the profession in...
Concept Result Safety and Mission Assurance Technical Excellence Program (STEP)                                     Career...
We DesignedIn Designing, we:      Explored off-the-shelf and advanced technological solutions      Used Bloom’s Taxonomy...
Design Results – Competency Wheels                      System Safety     6 Disciplines – over 250 Engineering Competencie...
Design Results – Performance ObjectivesFor each competency, detailed objectives were written to describe exactly whatperfo...
Design Results – Curriculums System Safety Level 2        Core Training        Discipline Training        Readings and ...
We DevelopedIn Developing, we:      Located off-the-shelf, best practice NASA and Industry tutorials and Subject-       m...
Development Results –STEP Course Delivery MethodologyLevels 2-4 Courses offerings are:      Web-based e-Learning (WBT) vi...
We Assembled and TestedIn Assembly and Test, we:      Performed subsystem tests on the individual courses and learner per...
We Conducted OperationsIn Operations from 2009-2011:      Provided over 45,000 hours of web-based and instructor-led NASA...
STEP - A NASA SMA Engineering TransformationImpact of Web-Based Training      SMA Instructor-Led & Web-Based Learners     ...
In SummaryThe quest for NASA Technical Excellence is never ending andthe Organization’s Professional development system mu...
Parting Thoughts to PonderAs a NASA Project and Engineering Leader…      Are you using APPEL and other Engineering Profes...
I’m interested in your thoughts and          some discussion…31   http://nsc.nasa.gov/
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

J marinaro jmay

14,672 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
14,672
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
18
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • (Day 1 - beginning to accomplish the technical objectives, on cost, and schedule)
  • J marinaro jmay

    1. 1. National Aeronautics Space Administration Using a Systems Engineering Approach to Develop NASA Engineering Talent Mr. John Marinaro and Dr. James May NASA Safety Center www.nasa.gov
    2. 2. What does NASA’s future hold?2
    3. 3. One Thing is Certain…NASA faces an Engineering Challenge! Of the 11,216 NASA Engineers, 60% will be eligible to retire in the next 10 years. Of the remaining engineering population, 33% have less than five years of experience. These statistics indicate that NASA will face an engineering knowledge drain over the next decade. This is not a Center-specific challenge, but an Agency and Leadership Challenge. NASA Engineering Population Eligible for Retirement <5 Yrs Experience >5 Years Experience3
    4. 4. The Data to Support the Challenge (2011) NASA 08xx Series (All Centers) 50 to 70 orServiceAge Under 20 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 Total 54 older Under 5 6 347 399 246 197 156 163 136 57 16 5 0 1728 5 to 9 0 1 257 326 191 186 232 153 69 34 6 3 1458 10 to 14 0 0 3 214 194 208 274 189 85 47 18 7 1239 15 to 19 0 0 0 4 86 147 133 118 50 26 9 2 575 20 to 24 0 0 0 0 7 529 1081 596 304 145 47 17 2726 25 to 29 0 0 0 0 0 13 583 940 250 103 45 9 1943 30 to 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 469 343 121 48 17 1019 35 to 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 175 112 22 9 33240 or more 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 46 72 72 196 Total 6 348 659 790 675 1239 2487 2615 1339 650 272 136 11,216 Eligible to retire in the next 10 years with full benefits: 6710 Percent of the NASA Engineering population: 60% 4
    5. 5. Looking 10 Years Forward The year is 2021… NASA 08xx Series (All Centers) 70 orServiceAge Under 20 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 Total older Under 5 4400 4400 new Engineer hires in the next 10 years! 5 to 9 10 to 14 6 347 399 246 197 156 163 136 15 to 19 0 1 257 326 191 186 232 153 20 to 24 0 0 3 214 194 208 274 189 25 to 29 0 0 0 4 86 147 133 118 30 to 34 0 0 0 0 7 529 1081 596 35 to 39 The Senior Tier Retires – ~4400 Engineers40 or more Total 6 348 659 790 675 1226 1883 1192 11,216 5
    6. 6. What Does this Data Mean to You?10 years from now, if you are NASA Engineer and are not retired – GET READY!ARE YOU READY TO LEAD THIS CHANGE – while managing a challenging anddemanding NASA Project?You should be, this is an opportunity that affects all NASA Organizations…This presentation describes how the NASA Safety Center used theEngineering Lifecycle Model to achieve project success.6
    7. 7. How the NASA Safety Center is Tacklingthe Safety & Mission Assurance ChallengeProject Fundamentals and SMA Engineering Technical Excellence 7 http://nsc.nasa.gov/
    8. 8. NASA Safety Center  In 2005, the NASA Safety Center was established in Cleveland, OH  NASA Headquarters Strategic Guidance -- Build systems to improve NASA SMA knowledge, information and capability  Three primary impetus factors:  CAIB Report  Demographics  Need for engineering professionals to be trained in SMA8
    9. 9. NASA Safety Center (NSC)First and foremost, the NSC is not the NESC or the NSSCThe NSC is comprised of four primary Directorates:  Technical Excellence  Knowledge Management Systems  Audits & Assessments  Mishap Investigation Support9
    10. 10. SMA and STEPSafety and Mission Assurance Technical Excellence Program (STEP)  Agency’s Professional Development Systems for SMA professionals – from fresh-out to Subject Matter Expert  Six major SMA Disciplines: System Safety, Quality Engineering, Reliability & Maintainability, Operational Safety, Software Assurance, and Aviation Safety  Career-oriented and competency-based  Appropriate for SMA, Engineering, and Project Managers  Heavy emphasis on web-based training via SATERN10
    11. 11. STEP’s Overnight Success  In less than 3 years, STEP has become recognized Agency-wide as the way SMA trains  750 SMA Civil Servants have voluntarily completed Level 1 (75% of the SMA population)  113 SATERN courses developed (650 hours of engineering-oriented training)  45,000+ hours of training completed  Highly successful NASA engineering-oriented training program11
    12. 12. Success ContributorsHow did we accomplish so much so quickly?  Inspiring leadership  Dedicated Civil Servant/Contractor team  Technical Discipline Teams with representatives from each Center SMA organization (60+ total members) and, most importantly, a solid process: The NASA Systems Engineering Project Lifecycle Model (NPR 7120.5)12
    13. 13. Treat it like a NASA Engineering Challenge / Project The NASA Systems Engineering Project Lifecycle Model (NPR 7120.5)  This lifecycle model works for Shuttles, Satellites, Airplanes, Automobiles, Ships, etc.  It also works for Training Program Development – from Formulation to Implementation13
    14. 14. The NASA Engineering Lifecycle ModelFive Primary Phases: A. Concept & Technical Development B. Preliminary Design and Technology Completion C. Final Design & Fabrication D. System Assembly, Integration, Test and Rollout E. Operations and Sustainment14
    15. 15. NASA Safety Center’s STEP as anEngineering Professional Development ModelThat’s exactly what we did for the NASA SMA community which accountsfor 10% of the NASA Engineering Workforce…  We analyzed the problem / challenge  Then:  We conceived,  We designed,  We fabricated,  We tested,  We operated and sustained, and  (when necessary…) We will closeout.This model and process helped us evolve NASA’s SMA career-oriented, professional development system – STEP15
    16. 16. We Started with a VisionMy VisionCreate the NASA University for Safety and ultimately become the Harvardand MIT of NASA Safety.Vision TipYour Vision should fit on the back of your Business Card (clear and concise)– Professor Bart Timm, Georgetown University Executive Leadership Program16
    17. 17. We ConceivedIn Conceiving, we:  Looked at successful technical professional development models  Benchmarked NASA and Industry Safety Training Programs  Spent time with our customers and stakeholders (NASA SMA and Engineering)  Engaged NASA Human Resources and the NASA Shared Services Center (NSSC)  Considered the career life-cycle of our SMA Engineers  Built six Technical Discipline Teams with representatives from each NASA Center SMA organization  Conceived a common framework  Focused internally on team development and cohesion  Developed a robust development and implementation schedule with Key Decision Points, Milestones, Phased Rollout Strategies, and built-in contingency slack for two of the key events  Developed a robust formulation to implementation cost analysis17
    18. 18. Engineering Professional DevelopmentEngineers Council for Professional Development (1979)"Engineering is the profession in which a knowledge of the mathematical andnatural sciences gained by study, experience, and practice is applied with judgmentto develop ways to utilize, economically, the materials and forces of nature for thebenefit of mankind.”18
    19. 19. Concept Result Safety and Mission Assurance Technical Excellence Program (STEP) Career-oriented Professional Development Program (duration: 8 – 10 years) Six major Discipline Programs  System Safety  Software Assurance  Quality Engineering  Reliability and Maintainability  Operational Safety  Aviation Safety Components  Four Qualification Levels  488 hours of Academics  1000 hours of OJT  Comprehensive Test  Peer-review Attributes  Comprehensive and Credible  Competency-based  Engineering-oriented19
    20. 20. We DesignedIn Designing, we:  Explored off-the-shelf and advanced technological solutions  Used Bloom’s Taxonomy (Hierarchy of Learning) for each Discipline  Developed major competencies, minor competencies, learning and performance objectives for each minor competency (~250 minor competencies)  Documented, documented, documented…  Peer-reviewed, peer-reviewed, peer-reviewed…  Assembled NASA HQs independent-review team for the major Milestone events  Developed test strategies and included time in the schedule  Developed minimum success criteria  Orchestrated Agency SMA organizational momentum strategies  Briefed every Center SMA Director face-to-face20
    21. 21. Design Results – Competency Wheels System Safety 6 Disciplines – over 250 Engineering Competencies21
    22. 22. Design Results – Performance ObjectivesFor each competency, detailed objectives were written to describe exactly whatperformance is expected at each level. (Typical performance objectives shown.)
    23. 23. Design Results – Curriculums System Safety Level 2  Core Training  Discipline Training  Readings and Resources  Domain Training  OJT  Enrichment Activities 3/2/201223
    24. 24. We DevelopedIn Developing, we:  Located off-the-shelf, best practice NASA and Industry tutorials and Subject- matter Experts focused on our courses and learning/performance objectives  Bought a video integration tool (Mediasite) to capture live courses and simultaneously integrate video, Powerpoint, and audio into web-based solutions for SATERN and webcasting  Reshaped our team to integrate new skill-sets and capabilities  Rapid-prototyped new course solutions (Build a little / Test a little)  Collaborated and pooled resources and needs with APPEL and other Center SMA and Engineering initiatives  Created licensing agreements with commercial providers to capture SATERN- ready courses and lectures for unlimited NASA use by Civil Servants and Contractors  Created Virtual Instructor-led Courses that are webcasted live training events24
    25. 25. Development Results –STEP Course Delivery MethodologyLevels 2-4 Courses offerings are:  Web-based e-Learning (WBT) via SATERN  Existing NASA instructor-led classroom training (ILT)  Videotaped ILT lectures using Sonic Foundy’s Mediasite technology  Virtual ILT courses using Webex and telecon  External WBT and ILT courses (Industry/Commercial Providers)25
    26. 26. We Assembled and TestedIn Assembly and Test, we:  Performed subsystem tests on the individual courses and learner performance tests  Simulated the operational in environment through internal (NSC) and external (GRC & MSFC SMA) full Beta-test runs of the Level 1 & Level 2 Curriculums in SATERN  Refined the courses and implementation based on Beta-test results and feedbackImplementation/Operations Preparation:  We planned and simulated a full-scale rollout that included an Agency-wide SMA webcast that was attended by 1000 participants  The Program Manager personally visited every NASA Center and HQs in the four months prior to Program rollout and commissioning and met with each Center SMA Director and their senior leadership team26
    27. 27. We Conducted OperationsIn Operations from 2009-2011:  Provided over 45,000 hours of web-based and instructor-led NASA- oriented training  Level 1 (Graduated/Enrolled): 2143 / 2246 (95% of the Active Learners)  Level 2 (Graduated/Enrolled): 29 / 331 (9%)  Level 3 Graduated (CS): 1  Civil Servants Active in Levels 2 – 4 (2011): 193  Civil Servants Hours Levels 2 – 4 (2011): 18,708.5 (includes OJT)27
    28. 28. STEP - A NASA SMA Engineering TransformationImpact of Web-Based Training SMA Instructor-Led & Web-Based Learners (July 2006 – December 2010) Pre-STEP STEP- 4400% increase in web-based training in the first operational Quarter of STEP Level 1!- 550% increase in NASA’s overall Safety training usage
    29. 29. In SummaryThe quest for NASA Technical Excellence is never ending andthe Organization’s Professional development system must becontinuously assessed from both the capability and strategicapplication perspectives…  We strategically apply the STEP Program to the SMA Community  We continuously measure performance  We listen to the voice of the customer (Learners) and stakeholders (SMA Leaders)29
    30. 30. Parting Thoughts to PonderAs a NASA Project and Engineering Leader…  Are you using APPEL and other Engineering Professional Development capabilities from a strategic perspective (do you have learning and development goals for each team member associated with team goals) or are team members choosing their own destiny (which may or may not be where the team needs them to be)?  Is your organization truly a driven and optimized learning organization?  Are your engineers using techniques from the 1980’s or are they using today’s industry and government best practices?30
    31. 31. I’m interested in your thoughts and some discussion…31 http://nsc.nasa.gov/

    ×