Zavala.ed

20,580 views
20,547 views

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
20,580
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Everything based on the same Resource loaded IMS and Threat Database. Updates to the IMS generated by other functions/processes automatically available for use in JCL, PPBE, etc. Updates to threat database easily reflected in reserves liens through a simple report of cost impacts. Changes to schedule can be used to mitigate threats/risks. JCL capability-if kept current- can provide reports identifying highest cost or schedule items, and can be fed back to mitigations.
  • Struture, graphic of general observatoryMission description for “why SOFIA”We were a program in transition and trying to implement restructured program at the same time….making it up as we go. Initial condition did not include steady state operations OR pre-development formulation. Reverse engineering of design, phased approach to get to early science, including ongoing requirements review. Classical SE&I tasks/requirements. If Ron & Laura presenting after, give a pitch.Category 1 Project, on GAO Large Scale Projects List (9 of 15 that experienced significant delays)….subject to a lot of external scrutiny smaller projects may not normally face.
  • Zavala.ed

    1. 1. Juggling Act:<br />Re-planning & Building an Observatory….<br />Simultaneously!!!!<br />Eddie Zavala – SOFIA Deputy Program Manager<br />Patricia Daws – SOFIA Program Business Manager<br />February 10, 2011<br />Used with permission<br />
    2. 2. Purpose<br /> This presentation discusses how the SOFIA Program, in the midst of a re-plan and system development phase, executed multiple simultaneous planning and business initiatives/requirements and integrated them into improved project management processes without impacting technical progress.<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />2<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    3. 3. Overview<br />The SOFIA Mission<br />Before the Re-plan<br />The Juggling Act<br />Managing the Chaos<br />Engage Existing and New Jugglers<br />The Results<br />KEY BREAKTHROUGHS<br />Conclusion<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />3<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    4. 4. The SOFIA Mission… <br />Feb 10, 2011<br />4<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    5. 5. Stratospheric Observatory For Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA)<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />5<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    6. 6. Feb 10, 2011<br />6<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    7. 7. Why SOFIA?<br /><ul><li>Infrared information is important to gather astronomy science data
    8. 8. IR can see through dust
    9. 9. IR can detect cold gases and dust, other cool stars, and planetary objects
    10. 10. Forming stars have their light intensity peaks in the IR
    11. 11. IR can detect the content of the early universe through red shift of distant objects
    12. 12. Infrared is filtered by moisture in atmosphere
    13. 13. At 41,000 ft, above more than 99% of the water vapor
    14. 14. Spacecraft consume infrared required cryogens' in 3 to 4 years
    15. 15. Mobility: anywhere, anytime
    16. 16. Long lifetime
    17. 17. A near-space observatory that comes home after every flight</li></ul>Feb 10, 2011<br />7<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    18. 18. The Orion Constellation<br />In Infrared Light<br />In Visible Light<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />8<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    19. 19. Before the re-plan… <br />Feb 10, 2011<br />9<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    20. 20. Program Background<br />The predecessor to SOFIA, the Kupier Airborne Observatory (KAO), was decommissioned in 1995 to start SOFIA<br />SOFIA established as a 80/20 partnership between US and Germany (NASA and DLR)<br />NASA receives 80% of available science time, DLR 20%<br />Initial program model, was contractor led with NASA oversight (privatized)<br />Program slated for cancellation in the spring of 2006<br />Agency approves program for continued funding in the fall of 2006<br />Program restructured<br />Government led contractor supported<br />Two projects, Science and Platform<br />Science at Ames Research Center<br />Platform at Dryden Flight Research Center<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />10<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    21. 21. Program Restructure<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />11<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    22. 22. Incremental / Phased Development Approach<br />Status - Sept 2007<br />Complete<br />Status of 7 Science Instruments Varies Dependent on the Instrument<br />Remaining<br />Decomposition & Definition<br />Integration & Verification<br />Decomposition & Definition<br />Integration & Verification<br />Partially<br />Complete<br />Integration & Verification<br />Decomposition & Definition<br />Fab. & Assemble<br />Fab. & Assemble<br />Decomposition & Definition<br />Mission Control & <br />Communications <br />System (MCCS)<br />Cavity Door Drive <br />System (CDDS)<br />Integration & Verification<br />Decomposition & Definition<br />Integration & Verification<br />Decomposition & Definition<br />Integration & Verification<br />Rework Required<br />Fab. & Assemble<br />Fab. & Assemble<br />Fab. & Assemble<br />Fab. & Assemble<br />Cavity Environmental Control <br />System (CECS)<br />A/C Modification<br />Telescope Assembly<br />Science Instruments (SI)<br />Cavity Door System (CDS)<br />Full Operational<br />Capability<br />TA Characterization & <br />Shared Purpose<br />Closed Door<br />Open Door<br />Early Science<br />Functional/Ferry<br />User Need<br />ΔSAR<br />ΔSAR<br />ΔSAR<br />ΔSAR<br />ΔSAR<br />Original<br /> Requirements<br /> Baseline<br /> Data Review<br /> Data<br />Review<br /> Data<br />Review<br /> Data Review<br /> Data Review<br />Requirements <br /> Re-Baseline<br />SAR<br />Flt Test<br />Flt Test<br />Flt Test<br />ORD<br />Flt Test<br />Flt Test<br />SRR<br />FRR<br />ΔSRR<br />ΔSRR<br />ΔSRR<br />FRR<br />FRR<br />FRR<br />ORR<br />ΔSRR<br /> Data<br />Review<br />Ground <br />Test<br />ΔORD<br />Ground <br />Test<br />Ground <br />Test<br />Ground <br />Test<br />Flt Test<br /> Ground <br />Test<br />ΔPDR<br />PDR<br />FRR<br />ΔPDR<br />Ground <br />Test<br />ΔCDR<br />ΔCDR<br />ΔCDR<br />ΔCDR<br />CDR<br />CDS/CDDS/CECS<br />MCCS Build #1<br />A/C Modification<br />TA/CECS<br />Instrumentation<br />CECS Improvements<br />Final MCCS/CECS-LN2<br />Science Instruments<br />MCCS for Early Science<br />Early Science Instruments<br />Final Upgrades<br />12<br />Segment 0<br />Segment 1<br />Segment 2<br />Segment 3<br />Segment 4<br />
    23. 23. Approximate Aircraft Configuration at Program Restructure, 2006<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />13<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    24. 24. The Juggling…<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />14<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    25. 25. Introducing the Juggler…<br />Program Restructure<br />Incremental Observatory Development<br />System Engineering & Integration<br />The SOFIA Program Office<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />15<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    26. 26. Build a World-Class Observatory<br />Inter-leaving Development and Early Science<br />(phased development approach)<br />Implementing the New Program Structure<br />Science Community Expectations<br />Integrating the New Team<br />Systems Engineering & Integration<br />Deploy working observatory capabilities and services<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />16<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    27. 27. New Challenges<br />Can you handle a few more balls in the air? <br />Subsystem development schedule delays<br />MCCS Development for Early Science<br />CDDS Technology Development Issues<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />17<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    28. 28. Working harder, but it’s all under control<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />18<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    29. 29. The Impossible Act…<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />19<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    30. 30. The “fun” begins…<br />Get to the Initiation of Science Flights <br />Technical Re-plan<br />Clear the flight envelope<br />GAO Large Program Assessment/Audit<br />Standing Review Board (SRB)<br />(but don’t drop any of the other balls!!)<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />20<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    31. 31. And the fun keeps coming….<br />Joint Cost & Schedule Confidence Level (JCL)<br />Earned Value Implementation<br />IG Pre Audit, Formal Audit, Recommendations<br />(but don’t drop any of the other balls!!)<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />21<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    32. 32. Something’s gotta give!!!!<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />22<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    33. 33. Managing the Chaos… <br />Feb 10, 2011<br />23<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    34. 34. Take a timeout….<br />What added value can we get from these new requirements?<br />What’s<br />feasible?<br />What’s<br />urgent?<br />What<br />don’t we know?<br />What’s<br />important?<br />How are we going <br />to get this done ?!<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />24<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    35. 35. Managing the Chaos…<br />Strategize….before you add more jugglers to the team, or even accept the balls<br />Sequence the balls…don’t try to accept them all at once<br />Leverage skill and experience of existing jugglers…<br />Learn new “juggling skills”<br />“Jugglers” and “juggling skills” equate to process improvement, functional groups, NOT additional staff<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />25<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    36. 36. Sequence the Balls<br />The timing of when new balls get thrown in the mix is critical to keeping everything in the air<br />Technical Re-plan<br />Standing Review Board (SRB)<br />Flight Test<br /><ul><li>Technical re-plan required
    37. 37. Same team preparing for initial flight test of the observatory
    38. 38. SRB required…but urgent?</li></ul>Feb 10, 2011<br />26<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    39. 39. Sequence the Balls<br /><ul><li>KEY DECISION: Prioritize Flight Test over the SRB
    40. 40. Provided a pre-brief to the SRB to give them time to get familiar with the program, but minimize impact to the project teams
    41. 41. Top priority – Conduct Flight Test so that we can start science missions
    42. 42. Rescheduleformal SRB after initial flight test phase complete</li></ul>Technical Re-plan<br />Flight Test<br />Standing Review Board<br /> (SRB)<br />Interim<br />baseline<br /><ul><li>KEY DECISION: Index the program to an interim baseline pending SRB recommendations</li></ul>Feb 10, 2011<br />27<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    43. 43. Engage Existing / New Jugglers… <br />Feb 10, 2011<br />28<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    44. 44. Engage Existing Jugglers…<br />Leverage existing team members and groups instead of adding to the confusion with new players<br /><ul><li>Introducing… </li></ul>Feb 10, 2011<br />29<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    45. 45. Juggler #2<br />The Observatory IPT<br />Owns the key skills to keep the act going…developing the observatory<br />Technical Coordination<br />Requirements Management<br />System Engineering & Integration<br />Mission Preparedness & Execution<br />Technical Risk Management<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />30<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    46. 46. Juggler #3<br />CRM has a new key skill…the THREAT DATABASE<br />Makes it easier for team to identify threats “on the fly”<br />“any issue that keeps you up at night”<br />Threats linked to milestones with quantified cost / schedule impacts<br />Improved Program risk identification<br />Continuous Risk Management<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />31<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    47. 47. The Threat Database…<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />32<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    48. 48. Communication of Concerns<br />“Significant” Risks tracked at Program Level<br />Program<br />Science<br />Platform<br />Traceability of concerns maintained from top to bottom<br />Threats “roll up” into formal Risks<br />Threats<br />Concerns are collected at the team level…<br />SOFIA Team Concerns<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />33<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    49. 49. Risks, Threats, and the JCL<br />Concerns from SOFIA Team<br />The threat database proved to be a good predictor of likely schedule impacts and helped focus mitigations<br />The threat database is used to populate the JCL risk register and the Risk Action Matrix at the Project and Program Level<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />34<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    50. 50. Two Coordinated Jugglers<br />Threat<br />DB<br />Synchronized by tossing the Threat Database ball back and forth<br />Continuous Risk<br />Management<br />Observatory<br />IPT<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />35<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    51. 51. Juggler #4<br />Tune up key juggling skills to manage more balls in the air at one time<br />By teaming with other Jugglers, tossing balls back and forth, sharing the load…<br />Leverage threat database for cost/risk integration (toss ball back and forth with CRM &Observatory IPT)<br />Leverage existing budget data for schedule/cost integration (coordinating with SPO)<br />Acquiring JCL implementation knowledge<br />Integrated technical and reserve management strategy<br />Integrated Schedule & Budget<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />36<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    52. 52. Unapproved<br />Unencumbered<br />Distributed<br />Approved<br />Threats<br />Unknowns<br />Reserves Management Strategy<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />37<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    53. 53. Three Coordinated Jugglers<br />Threat<br />DB<br />Schedule<br />Synchronized by tossing the Threat Database and Schedule balls back and forth<br />Continuous Risk<br />Management<br />Observatory<br />IPT<br />Integrated Schedule / Budget<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />38<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    54. 54. Bring the New Juggler#5….<br />Integrates cross-functional knowledge to create a new skill<br />Integrated Master Schedule with:<br />Tie to Threat Database via JCL Risk Registry<br />Resource Loaded Tasks<br />JCL plug-in <br />Leverage JCL for EVM Implementation<br />Institutionalize value-added processes and analyses<br />Ensure continual improvement and sustaining processes through coordination with other jugglers<br />Schedule IPT<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />39<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    55. 55. Program-wide Coordination<br />Threat<br />DB<br />IMS<br />Continuous Risk<br />Management<br />Observatory<br />IPT<br />Integrated Schedule / Budget<br />Schedule<br />IPT<br />SOFIA Program Office<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />40<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    56. 56. Results<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />41<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    57. 57. Accomplishments<br />Can really work together and perform tricks!!!<br /><ul><li>Completed technical re-plan
    58. 58. Successful First Flight with 100% open door
    59. 59. Successful First Light through telescope in the air
    60. 60. Completed Envelope Expansion
    61. 61. Completed JCL
    62. 62. Successful SRB
    63. 63. Completed Re-plan with APMC
    64. 64. Completed EVM Implementation
    65. 65. Completed Observatory testing with Integrated MCCS/CDDS for Early Science.
    66. 66. Initiation of Science Flights on Nov 30 / Dec 1, 2010!!!</li></ul>Feb 10, 2011<br />42<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    67. 67. Key Breakthroughs<br />Key decisions made to set down balls…not drop them<br />Leveraged the results of technical re-plan <br />Re-sequenced SRB appropriately<br />Program indexed with an interim baseline<br />Enhanced CRM processes<br />Threat database construct<br />Linking threats to specific activities, identify cost and schedule impact<br />Use threat database as primary source for JCL inputs<br />Feeder to traditional risk management – augment, don’t replace<br />Integrated Master Schedule<br />Resources, threats, JCL/EVM enabled<br />Finding a way to dissolve traditional stovepipes<br />Key relationships (Business Manager, CE, SPO, PMs…)<br />Integrated products that allow for cross-functional use and enabled new teams to implement new requirements<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />43<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    68. 68. Conclusion<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />44<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    69. 69. Conclusion<br /><ul><li>The SOFIA Program found ways to leverage existing roles in new ways to meet the requirements without creating unmanageable overhead. The team developed strategies and value added processes - such as improved risk identification, structured reserves management, cost/risk integration - so that the effort expended resulted in a positive return to the program.</li></ul>Feb 10, 2011<br />45<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    70. 70. The Improved Operating Model<br />JCL<br />Program Risks / RAM<br />EVM<br />Schedule<br />IPT<br />CRM<br />Threat Database<br />Resource Loaded IMS<br />Observatory IPT<br />PPBE <br />SPO<br />Integrated Budget<br />Reserves Mgt<br />Obsv Capabilities <br />FOC<br />ISF<br />GAO Audits<br />SE&I<br />SRB<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />46<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    71. 71. Questions?<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />47<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    72. 72. SOFIA First Flight at Waco, April 26, 2007<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />48<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    73. 73. SOFIA Door Fully Open In-Flight, Dec 18, 2009<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />49<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    74. 74. Successful 100% Door Open Landing; April 14, 2010<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />50<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    75. 75. Telescope in Aft Cavity<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />51<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    76. 76. SOFIA First Light Image – JupiterMay 26, 2010<br />SOFIA infrared image <br />(5.4, 24.2, and 37.1 m)<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />52<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    77. 77. SOFIA First Light Image – M82<br />SOFIA infrared image (19.7, 31.5, and 37.1 m)<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />53<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />
    78. 78. Initiation of Science FlightsNov 1 – Dec 1, 2010<br />Feb 10, 2011<br />54<br />2011 PM Challenge<br />

    ×