Downloaded 29 times
![NASA LSP MISSIONS ON CONTRACT
* Tracks ATP’d/awarded missions in the LSP Mission Life cycle Phase III through Phase VII
FORMULATION IMPLEMENTATION FPO Update: Dec. 2011
S/C
PROJECT Pre- Phase Phase Phase Phase Phase
LIFE CYCLE Phase A A B C D E
LSP
MISSION
LIFE CYCLE
INTEGRATED
Launch – 10-4yrs L – 4-3 yrs L – 3 or L-2 yrs L – 27 mo to L-3 mo L – 3 mo-10 days L – 10 days-Launch Launch + 3 mo
ACTIVITIES
MCR SR Assi MD PD Missi FP ATP CD SIR MIWGs HAR GO LSR LVRR OR SMS FR LR LAUNC PLAR Mission
R gn R R/ on B (LSP R /GOW s R R R R R R H Success
LEGEND MIT NA Plan ) Gs
Launch R 2011
Services GRAIL [Cx17, Sept.]*
Program (LSP)
Spacecraft (S/C) JUNO [CX41, Aug.]*
AQUARIUS [SLC2, June]
NPP [SLC2, Oct*]
2012 MSL [Cx41, Nov.*]
* : Range Date NuSTAR, [KWAJ, NET
**:Advisory Mar.]*
Service
RBSP [Cx41, Sept.]
E: Extended
Integration IRIS [ VAFB, Dec.]
Cycle
TDRS-K [ Cx41, U/R
NET: No Earlier
Than Dec.]
U/R: Under
Review 2013
LDCM [ SLC3, Jan.) ]
ARC JPL OCO-II [ 576E, NET Feb.
DOD JSC ]
GSFC MSFC
LaRC LADEE [WFF, Mar.] **
GPM Core [TK, July.] **
MAVEN [Cx41, Nov.]
December 2011 19](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/albertsierra-120302151144-phpapp01/85/Albert-sierra-19-320.jpg)
More Related Content
![Company Profile [Eng]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/companyprofilemacnileng-130404022005-phpapp01-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
Albert sierra
- 1. Viewing Projects &Missions as Solution Delivery Efforts Presented to: PM Challenges 2012 Presented by: Adalberto Sierra Flight Projects Chief, Launch Services Program, KSC Tim Kotnour, PhD. Engineering Leadership & Innovation Institute University of Central Florida 1
- 2. We’ll Share aConversation about Delivering Missions. • LSP exists to deliver launch service solutions to our spacecraft customer • We are continuing an evolutionary journey to enhance our services to our customers • To help us to continue to improve, we viewed our work from a “solution delivery” perspective • We are continuing to improve • We have lessons learned on how to use the “lunch and learn” process 2
- 3. LSP Vision To be the recognized leader in launch services LSP Mission Leadership and expertise in providing on-orbit, on-time, on-cost launch services LSP Goals: Goal 1: Maximize Mission Success Goal 2: Assure Long-Term Launch Services Goal 3: Promote Evolution of a US Commercial Space Launch Market Goal 4: Continually Enhance LSP’s Core Capabilities 3
- 4. LSP acts asthe broker… With a goal of ensuring mission success 4
- 5. Launch Services Overview Verify and validate Insight and Approval of Acquire Launch Services mission engineering and analysis production, integration, testing and processing Provide technical, operational, contractual, budget and Manage launch vehicle to business knowledge and spacecraft integration expertise to future missions Establish strategic partnerships and make Certify launch systems investments to satisfy Agency launch service for NASA use needs 2 5
- 6. Launch Services Program(LSP) • LSP manages commercially-developed and procured launch services for NASA – LSP provides acquisition management, technical management, mission integration and launch management – Science Mission Directorate is LSP’s primary customer, although other Government agencies also use NASA launch services – LSP uses a mixed fleet of vehicles (small, medium & intermediate) with varying levels of performance to support a variety of mission requirements – Launches are conducted from multiple ranges: CCAFS, VAFB, RTS (Kwajalein), WFF (Wallops), and Kodiak • Launch service providers sell the same basic launch service to commercial and other government customers – The launch service providers, rather than NASA, retain title to hardware and control of vehicle standards, specifications, etc. 6
- 7. Launch Services ManagementApproach • Acquire launch services under fixed price contracts with consistent level of technical oversight over full spectrum of launch capability for mission success – Heritage and evolved systems – Primary payloads on all classes of vehicle • NASA Governance Model provides independent technical assessment – Two independent assessments provided to the Program: » Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) Technical Authority » Engineering Technical Authority • Establish partnerships with NRO, USAF, and other agencies (MDA, DARPA) on mission assurance and lessons learned from launch failures – Share information and data across government organizations responsible for mission assurance – Each organization evaluates data based on its own risk posture – LSP considers the rationale for other organization’s decisions; although does not have to always concur 7
- 8. LSP Mixed FleetApproach Vehicles On NLS II Contract Pegasus Taurus XL Atlas V Delta II Falcon 1 Falcon 9 Athena IC Athena IIC Potential/Emerging Vehicles 7 Minotaur Taurus II Delta IV IV/V 8
- 9. Roles and Responsibilitiesof the LSP Flight Projects Office • The Flight Projects Office is responsible for managing the launch service provided for the spacecraft missions • It accomplishes its role through the Mission Manager which is the project manager/team leader for Launch Services Program mission integration teams • This team is responsible for technical, schedule, and resources, from early spacecraft design/development through launch and mission success determination • The office is the primary program point of contact for the spacecraft customers and launch service contractors for all mission activities and requirements • The office is also responsible for ensuring consistent implementation of effective processes across missions, for management of special projects, and for producing LSP publications that benefit the LSP and the spacecraft community 9
- 10. Roles and Responsibilitiesof the MM • The Mission Manager (MM) is the project manager and primary interface for the Launch Services Program to the NASA Spacecraft Programs/Projects and to the launch service contractors for assigned missions (typical is 2-5 missions at various phases in lifecycle). • The MM is ultimately responsible for managing all aspects (technical, resources, and schedule) of the integration of assigned missions from advanced planning through integration, launch, and mission success determination. • The MM executes the duties of mission management through leadership and management of a multi-disciplined mission team. Day-to-day decision authority on the mission is with the MM. 10
- 11. We’ll Share aConversation about Delivering Missions. • LSP exists to deliver launch service solutions to our spacecraft customer • We are continuing an evolutionary journey to enhance our services to our customers • To help us to continue to improve, we viewed our work from a “solution delivery” perspective • We are continuing to improve • We have lessons learned on how to use the “lunch and learn” process 11
- 12. We are Continuingan Evolutionary Journey to Enhance Our Services to Our Customers. How we lead the program Strategic Strategic Strategic Strategic Problem Planning Management Leadership Solving How we relate to the customer Customer Customer Customer Satisfaction Relationship Input Measurement Management How we deliver the mission Technical Project Solution Process Management Delivery 12
- 13. We are Continuingan Evolutionary Journey to Enhance Our Services to Our Customers. John F. Kennedy Space Center LAUNCH SERVICES PROGRAM BOSS Business Operating Success Strategies (LSP-UG-330.01 rev. Basic) Project Management Challenge What is BOSS? John F. Kennedy Space Center LAUNCH SERVICES PROGRAM February 26, 2007 4 13
- 14. We’ll Share aConversation about Delivering Missions. • LSP exists to deliver launch service solutions to our spacecraft customer • We are continuing an evolutionary journey to enhance our services to our customers • To help us to continue to improve, we viewed our work from a “solution delivery” perspective • We are continuing to improve • We have lessons learned on how to use the “lunch and learn” process 14
- 15. To Help Usto Continue to Improve, We Saw the Need to View Our Work from a Solution Delivery Perspective. • Program Drivers – Align to the program’s emerging and expanding strategic direction – Understand and align to customer expectations and feedback – Improve program performance • FPO Drivers – Enhance MM awareness and performance – Build a common understanding across MMs – Enhance overall consistency in delivering the program • Understand “best practices” – Internal to the program – External from other organizations 15
- 16. To Help Usto Continue to Improve, We Saw the Need to View Our Work from a Solution Delivery Perspective. Traditional View Solution Delivery View Different Light • Delivering the launch service is • LSP delivers solutions • New perspectives a project • Solution = Close a gap • Adjustments to daily • Focus on meeting the service at activities cost, schedule, and technical is • Spacecraft customer’s gap = a project Launch service that meets cost, • Adjustments to core schedule, and technical needs processes • The Mission Manager manages the project management • Solution delivery requires process integrated approach of many disciplines • The Mission Manager manages the solution delivery process • Delivering 6 daily outcomes will deliver the 4 project outcomes 16
- 17. LSP Operates ina Complex Environment. • Different providers—manage a fleet of services • Different customers/missions • Different products and services • More than just launches – Full life-cycle support – Mission assurance – Technical integration – S/C processing facility/support – Business/contract management • Many missions in different stages of execution • Go beyond a single mission 17
- 18. LSP Supports ManyMissions. ADVANCED PLANNING MISSION PHASES Supporting ADVISORY (A) Spacecraft Pre- Phase A Phase A Phase B Programs/AO’s POTENTIAL ADVISORY (PA) Earth Venture (EV) Explorers INTERNATIONAL (I) Pre- • MIDEX Mission Mission • SMEX Planning Planning Discovery New Frontiers S/C Activity New Millennium LPRP DECADAL ESSP Launch – 10-4yrs L – 4-3 yrs ICRS/COTS (A) LSP Activity HyspIRI Launch Services PATH O.C.T. ASCENDS MCR SRR Assign Mission PDR/ GRACE-II MDR MT Plan NAR GEO-CAPE Discovery 12 ARC SCLP ICESAT 2 ACE Jupiter Europa Jason-3 (I) o GRC Orbiter (JEO) Solar Orbiter GACM SMAP Jason CS1 Solar Probe Plus GSFC SWOT GEMS Cryo-PropStorg OSIRIS-Rex (NF3) LIST GOES R / S • JPL 3D-Winds Transf (CPST) JPSS TSIS EXOMARS / TGO ○ JSC ILN (I) GPM LIO Explorers 2011 º LaRC » MSFC MARS (NASA/ESA Partnership) Support to Agency Planning / Initiatives •MARS ROVERS (1 NASA, 1 ESA) - 2018 •MARS SAMPLE RETURN – 2020 • Commercial Crew Development • Orion Test Flight-1 • Docking Node Updated Dec 2011 18
- 19. NASA LSP MISSIONSON CONTRACT * Tracks ATP’d/awarded missions in the LSP Mission Life cycle Phase III through Phase VII FORMULATION IMPLEMENTATION FPO Update: Dec. 2011 S/C PROJECT Pre- Phase Phase Phase Phase Phase LIFE CYCLE Phase A A B C D E LSP MISSION LIFE CYCLE INTEGRATED Launch – 10-4yrs L – 4-3 yrs L – 3 or L-2 yrs L – 27 mo to L-3 mo L – 3 mo-10 days L – 10 days-Launch Launch + 3 mo ACTIVITIES MCR SR Assi MD PD Missi FP ATP CD SIR MIWGs HAR GO LSR LVRR OR SMS FR LR LAUNC PLAR Mission R gn R R/ on B (LSP R /GOW s R R R R R R H Success LEGEND MIT NA Plan ) Gs Launch R 2011 Services GRAIL [Cx17, Sept.]* Program (LSP) Spacecraft (S/C) JUNO [CX41, Aug.]* AQUARIUS [SLC2, June] NPP [SLC2, Oct*] 2012 MSL [Cx41, Nov.*] * : Range Date NuSTAR, [KWAJ, NET **:Advisory Mar.]* Service RBSP [Cx41, Sept.] E: Extended Integration IRIS [ VAFB, Dec.] Cycle TDRS-K [ Cx41, U/R NET: No Earlier Than Dec.] U/R: Under Review 2013 LDCM [ SLC3, Jan.) ] ARC JPL OCO-II [ 576E, NET Feb. DOD JSC ] GSFC MSFC LaRC LADEE [WFF, Mar.] ** GPM Core [TK, July.] ** MAVEN [Cx41, Nov.] December 2011 19
- 20. We Took aSolution Delivery Perspective to View our Work: We Went Below the Waterline to Understand Deeper. Why Cost, Schedule, What outcomes define mission success Technical, & for a project? Customer Satisfaction 6 Solution Delivery What requirements do we need to meet to deliver on these outcomes? Requirements What disciplines/functions are needed to 16 Disciplines deliver the requirements? What activities do we execute on a daily 85 Daily Functions basis for the functions? How 20
- 21. We Took aSolution Delivery Perspective to View our Work: Six Solution Delivery Requirements. 1) Gain Needed 6) Mature the Commitment & Business Resources Cost, Schedule, Technical, & Customer Satisfaction 6 Solution Delivery Requirements 5) Execute as 2) Gain Promised & Customer 16 Disciplines Meet Acceptance and Accountabilities Use 85 Daily Functions 4) Apply the 3) Produce the Right Right Products Knowledge & Services (Kotnour 2008, Strategic Solutions Delivery™) 21
- 22. We Took aSolution Delivery Perspective to View our Work: Sixteen Disciplines. Cost, Schedule, Technical, & Customer Satisfaction 6 Solution Delivery Requirements 16 Disciplines 85 Daily Functions (Kotnour 2008, Strategic Solutions Delivery™) 22
- 23. We Took aSolution Delivery Perspective to View our Work: A WBS View. Solution Delivery Successful Project = Delivered Solution = Closed a Gap Outcomes First Order Technical Customer Cost Schedule Performance Satisfaction Requirements Delivery Execute as Gain Needed Gain Customer Produce the Right Apply the Right Promised and Mature the Resources and Acceptance and Products & Knowledge Meet Business Commitment Use Services Accountabilities 1. Strategic 3. Customer 6. Systems 9. Human capital 11. Project 14. Knowledge management relationship engineering management management management Disciplines 2. Portfolio management 7. Technical 10. Partner 12. Project 15. New business Core management 4. Stakeholder excellence management leadership development management 8. Technology 13. Critical 16. Performance 5. Change management thinking improvement management (Copyright, Kotnour 2005) 23
- 24. We’ll Share aConversation about Delivering Missions. • LSP exists to deliver launch service solutions to our spacecraft customer • We are continuing an evolutionary journey to enhance our services to our customers • To help us to continue to improve, we viewed our work from a “solution delivery” perspective • We are continuing to improve • We have lessons learned on how to use the “lunch and learn” process 24
- 25. We Followed aSystematic “Lunch and Learn” Process. Introductory Self-Assessment Six Reflection Wrap-Up Session Session Survey Sessions 25
- 26. We Reflected UponOur Performance. 2) Customer Feedback 4) Group Discussion Reflection • How do we now perform the role? • What are we doing well? • What are not doing well? 1) Definition of • What are the roles & the focus responsibilities? • What can we do to improve? 3) Self- Assessment 26
- 27. 1) Gain NeededCommitment & Resources Discipline LSP’s Current Implementation Strategic Management • Launch Service Task Order (LSTO) • Aligning the project to the organization’s strategy and developing an • Flight Planning Board overall strategy for the project. Portfolio Management • Understanding and aligning the project to other projects within the organization’s portfolio of projects Improvement Ideas • Bring lessons learned from other missions earlier into the process • Hold a meeting with the SC project earlier in the mission before the formal reviews • Attend spacecraft system requirements meetings 27
- 28. 2) Gain CustomerAcceptance and Use Discipline LSP’s Current Implementation Customer Relationship Management • Customer Forums • Developing an ongoing productive relationship with the customer • Mission Integration Teams • Flight Planning Board Stakeholder Management • Mission Integration Working Groups • Understanding and influencing external and internal environments (MIWGs) and creating positive relationships with stakeholders Change Management • Transitioning individuals, teams, and organizations from a current state to a desired future state Improvement Ideas • Conduct lessons learned with the spacecraft project team • Provide an “informal” routine conversation to share emerging issues with projects and customers • Re-instate the MM monthly meeting to share LL/issues/concerns among the FPO team (e.g., 7/15 meeting started this new approach) • Formalize customer meeting for each gate • Implement approach to visit with customer to have a conversation on how well doing • Understand how we need to adapt the process and approach for the given mission 28
- 29. 3) Produce theRight Products & Services Discipline LSP’s Current Implementation Systems Engineering • Mission Integration Teams (MITs) Converting customer needs into requirements that a solution can be • Task Assignments (TAs)—contract mods built from—Managing requirements (e.g., define, allocate, trace, and • Engineering Review Boards (ERBs) verify) • Pre-board meetings Technical Excellence Producing the solution—design, engineering, programming, etc. Technology Management • Ensuring the appropriate technology is used—technology scanning, forecasting, and selection Improvement Ideas • Understand how NASA’s new direction will impact LSP provided services • See if need a “master technology strategic” plan vs. just mission-by-mission • Connect to studies process • Look for ways to increase LV capability • Reinvigorate line item for LV capability 29
- 30. 4) Apply theRight Knowledge Discipline LSP’s Current Implementation Human Capital Management • Establishing MITs • Identifying the skill needs for the project and organize the resources • Making mid-course corrections when on the team need to • Support contract and NASA seamless— Partner Management ”badge free” zone • Managing external partners on the team—Identifying the partners • Partnership meetings and managing their involvement on the team • NLS II Improvement Ideas • Work with launch services providers on challenges they face and on ensuring they deliver—they are becoming less responsive • Ensure team members have the skills aligned with the mission needs • Provide training opportunities to keep MM leadership skills current with new ideas/techniques • Gather feedback on team work while in the mission • Conduct “start-stop-continue as a team” discussion at a gate • Conduct “what doing well, not so well as a team” discussion at a gate • Conduct “team alignment” discussion at a gate 30
- 31. 5) Execute asPromised & Meet Accountabilities Discipline LSP’s Current Implementation Project Management • BOSS • Planning, organizing, directing, and controlling of resources to meet • Integrated schedules project objectives • Monthly mission review • PTI (MM’s only) Project Leadership • Adapt approach to the customer and • Building the project team into a cohesive unit that understands and mission meets its accountabilities Critical Thinking • Practicing good problem solving and decision making Improvement Ideas • Work with launch services providers on challenges they face and on ensuring they deliver • Ensure team members have the skills aligned with the mission needs • Ensure the MM is in the loop during the launch campaign • Share knowledge across mission (e.g., run the PTI like used to) • Manage the middle phases better • Use BOSS beyond just the gate review 31
- 32. 6) Grow theBusiness Discipline LSP’s Current Implementation Knowledge Management • New capabilities • Improving learning within and across projects. • PPODS • XPC • Advisory role • DOD asking how LSP does business New Business Development • Using the BOSS for standardization • Understanding the current project can lead to future projects for the • Adapting the BOSS as see areas that need current or new customer to be improved • Share lessons learned via M3 Performance Improvement • Adapting the BOSS real-time • Improving the process, tools, and skills within the project and improving the organization’s overall processes, tools, and skills used on all projects Improvement Ideas • Adapt the BOSS to other types of missions beyond end-to-end (e.g., advisory, PPODS, XPC) • Understand how the Air Force uses different tools that we don’t (e.g., government certified pricing) • Balance resources for growing the business and delivering the business • Improve the way do lessons learned to make them part of the process, inherent part of the process-- Overcome the view that lessons learned are a database 32
- 33. LSP Is aSolution Provider. Requirement Discipline LSP’s Implementation Gain Needed • Strategic Management • Launch Service Task Order (LSTO) Commitment and • Portfolio Management • Flight Planning Board Resources Gain Customer • CRM • Customer Forums Acceptance and Use • Stakeholder • Mission Integration Teams • Change • Flight Planning Board • Mission Integration Working Groups (MIWGs) Produce the Right • Systems Engineering • Mission Integration Teams (MITs) Products and Services • Technical Excellence • Task Assignments (TAs)—contract mods • Technology • Engineering Review Boards (ERBs) Management • Pre-board meetings Apply the Right • Human Capital • Establishing MITs Knowledge Management • Making mid-course corrections when need to • Partner Management • Support contract and NASA seamless—”badge free” zone • Partnership meetings • NLS II Execute as Promised and • Project Management • BOSS Meet Accountabilities • Project Leadership • Integrated schedules • Critical Thinking • Monthly mission review • PTI (MM’s only) • Adapt approach to the customer and mission Mature the Business • Knowledge • New capabilities Management • PPODS • New Business • XPC Development • Advisory role • Performance • DOD asking how LSP does business Improvement • Using the BOSS for standardization • Adapting the BOSS as see areas that need to be improved • Share lessons learned via M3 • Adapting the BOSS real-time 33
- 34. We Confirmed OurCore Job as Solution Providers. 1) The entire space industry is under pressure 2) FPO continues to be aligned with the program’s strategic direction 3) The MM is accountable for delivering a solution over the life-cycle of the mission 4) The MM’s core solution/mission delivery process has three elements 5) The MM plays a different role for each task 6) The MM balances being an administrator and a leader 7) The MM needs to adjust the mission delivery process to a) To specific mission needs and the program’s big picture b) The specific mission’s variables c) The launch service provider and the customer 8) The MM engages the customer over the mission’s life-cycle 9) The MM builds a relationship with the customer over the mission’s life-cycle 34
- 35. LSP Tailors ItsProducts and Services to the Needs of the Customer. Mission Solution Delivery Governance Mission Delivery Daily (BOSS) Leadership • 7120 • Deliverables • Communication • 8610 • Reviews • Relationship building • 8623 • Services • Meetings • Team structure & interactions (NASA & LSP) (FPO) (Mission Mgr) Increasing flexibility to adjust and tailor 35
- 36. LSP Tailors ItsProducts and Services to the Needs of the Customer. NASA Strategic Context (Congress & Agency Guidance) HQ ? Relationships Tailoring Daily Mission MIT Team Mission Type Management Approach Launch Vehicle MM (Provider) Experience (contract mechanisms) S/C Project Mgr & Team 36
- 37. The MM Playsa Different Role for Each Task. 37
- 38. We’ll Share aConversation about Delivering Missions. • LSP exists to deliver launch service solutions to our spacecraft customer • We are continuing an evolutionary journey to enhance our services to our customers • To help us to continue to improve, we viewed our work from a “solution delivery” perspective • We are continuing to improve • We have lessons learned on how to use the “lunch and learn” process 38
- 39. We Have LessonsLearned on How to Use the “Lunch and Learn” Process. • Tie the effort to the Program’s overall strategy and improvement efforts • Use a model to guide the self-assessment survey and conversations. The overall model was used to – Develop our BOSS – Develop our customer-satisfaction survey – Develop the self-assessment survey and the lunch and learn sessions • Use other data (e.g., customer survey data) to provide mission specific feedback and examples • Provide time in between sessions to process data and try new things • Balance the conversation with the push for new actions – This is as much about viewing the job differently as (maybe more than) identifying new action items – Our action items ranged from program-level actions to individual mission manager changes to common philosophy agreement 39
- 40. We’ll Share aConversation about Delivering Missions. • LSP exists to deliver launch service solutions to our spacecraft customer • We are continuing an evolutionary journey to enhance our services to our customers • To help us to continue to improve, we viewed our work from a “solution delivery” perspective • We are continuing to improve • We have lessons learned on how to use the “lunch and learn” process 40
- 41. Questions, Thoughts, Concerns,Ideas… 41
- 42. • NEW HORIZON ◊ MAVEN ◊ MSL • MARS ORBITER-1 ◊ ExoMars/T • MARS LANDER-1 GO • MER-A & B • MRO ◊ GRAIL • ODYSSEY • LRO/LCROSS • PHOENIX MOON • AIM ◊ JUNO • AQUA • AQUARIUS • AURA • CALIPSO/CLOUDSAT • MESSENGER • DART • KEPLER • DS1-SEDSAT • EO1/SAC-C/MUNIN • FUSE • HESSI • GALEX • OCO • SORCE • GENESIS • OSTM/Jason-2 ◊ NuSTAR • WISE • GLAST • QUIKSCAT • SDO • GLORY • SCISAT • GOES – L, M • SORCE • GP-B • ST-5 • HETE-2 • SIRTF ◊ JASON-3 • IBEX • SWAS ◊ LDCM • ICESAT/CHIPSAT • SWIFT ◊ MMS • IMAGE • TDRS – H, I, & J ◊ NPP • JASON/TIMED • TERRA ◊ OCO-2 • KODIAK STAR • TERRIERS ◊ RBSP • LANDSAT-7 • THEMIS ◊ TDRS-K, L • CONTOUR • MAP • WIRE • DAWN • NOAA – L, M, N, N’ • DEEP IMPACT • STARDUST 42
Editor's Notes
- #2 Today we will share a conversation about how we deliver missions. As you will see we are taking a different view to mission delivery. We are taking this view to help us continue to improve how we deliver.
- #3 We’ll use this slide as an outline for our talk. For those of you who don’t know LSP, I’ll provide a short overview.This overview helps sets a common frame of reference of our role in the Agency. It is within this view that we are looking at to improve—our role as launch solution providers for our customers.
- #10 To accomplish the LSP mission, LSP uses Mission Managers within the Mission Management Office.
- #12 Given this background of LSP, I’d like to share with you how the program has evolved and how the approach I am going to share with you is just another part of the evolution of the program.
- #13 As a high-level summary you can wee that LSP has taken efforts to improve how we manage and deliver our missions. We have:Evolved how we lead the programEvolved how we to the customerEvolved how we deliver the mission.The rest of this talk will focus on the solution delivery approach to mission delivery. We have taken this approach to help us broaden our perspective and to see how multiple disciplines are connected to bring value to the customer.
- #14 In a previous PM challenges presentation we shared how we developed our “BOSS”. BOSS is our approach at integrating individual functions and disciplines into a solution delivery methodology.The current effort is to remind, review, and reflect on how well our mission managers are delivering solutions.
- #15 Using the solution delivery perspective, we are aiming to better understand our work.
- #16 Our effort was driven by both the Program and Office’s desire to improve.To improve we were looking at best practices within our office and from other organizations.I’ll share the model we are using to help look at our work in a different way.
- #17 We augmented the traditional view of projects. We added a “solution delivery” perspective to the project perspective. By adding this solution delivery perspectives we were able to see our work in a new way which helped us identify potential items to improve.
- #18 As we explore the improvement areas we need to remind ourselves the complexity of the LSP mission and the LSP mission manager role.This complexity is driven by the many concurrent missions and services we are responsible for.
- #21 As we go through this, we’ll see how we view our work from the solution delivery perspective.We asked ourselves a series of questions to better understand our work:What outcomes define mission success?This is easy.This is the traditional view.Cost, schedule, technical, and customer satisfaction.We wanted to dig a bit further and asked our self: What requirements do we need to meet to deliver these mission success outcomes?As you will see we defined 6 requirementsI’ll share more about these in the next few slides.We then asked our self: What disciplines/functions are needed to deliver the requirements.As you will see we defined 16 disciplines.We then asked: What activities do we execute on a daily basis for the 16 functions?We can ask why? Or how? Either way we can see that the activities deliver the outcomes and the outcomes drive the activities.
- #22 We can define the 6 delivery requirements.The first 2 (highlighted in green)—relate to the traditional outcomes required by NASA projects:Produce the right products and services—produce the right spacecraft—do good technical workExecute as promised and meet accountabilities—manage the project—do good project management.To deliver solutions, we found there are 4 more requirements:Gained needed commitment and resources—ensure the project is strategically relevantGain customer acceptance and use—ensure there is a productive relationship with the customerApply the right knowledge—build the right team with the right knowledgeMature the business—we need to view each project as a learning opportunity—an opportunity to improveAs you can see the mission manager’s job is more than doing traditional project management.
- #23 When we take these 6 requirements, we need to understand the disciplines to deliver these.We will review each of these areas a bit deeper in a minute. But you can see that each requirement is met by multiple functions or disciplines.We used these disciplines to help define the activities we need to execute on a daily basis.
- #24 We can use the WBS to view the connection of outcomes, requirements, and core disciplines.As you can see there functions are connected to delivering the requirements.
- #25 Using this solution delivery model, we reflected on our performance to help us improve. I’ll now share with you our approach to use this model. We used a “lunch and learn” approach.
- #26 To help us remind, review, and reflect we used a lunch and learn approach.We started with an introductory session where we introduced every to the intent of the sessions and the overall model.Based on this understanding, each member of the office completed a self-assessment.Using the results from the assessment, we held 6 reflection sessions. Each session corresponded to one of the delivery outcomes.Finally, we had a wrapup session where we integrated our observations and learnings from each session.
- #27 During the reflection assessments we used a semi-structured approach. Each session was defined around one of the delivery requirements.For each session we had a worksheet. The worksheet:Described the delivery requirement and core disciplinesCustomer feedbackas I shared with you earlier, LSP uses a customer survey process to gather customer feedbackWe took this data and sorted the results to the requirement we were reflecting onSelf assessmentEach MM took a survey that asked them to describe their views on their role in executing the activity associated with the disciplineWe used this data to drive conversation and shared understandingGroup discussion reflectionUsing the customer feedback and the self-assessment data we were able to answer a set of reflective questions amongst ourselves:How do we now perform the role?What are we doing well?What are not doing well?What are the roles & responsibilities?What can we do to improve?Answering these questions helped us identify improvement areas
- #28 As I just shared, we held a session for each requirement area.Each requirement is met by one or more disciplines.For each requirement area we identified how we now meet this requirement.We also identified the improvement ideas.
- #34 In summary, when we concluded the sessions, we integrated how we now are solution providers.This table summarizes some of the ways we are solution providers.
- #35 During the final session, we integrated our observations. Some of the observations are obvious—this was good—we re-confirmed what we are about.Some of these observations were reminders.
- #36 As we talked about our role, we were reminded that:We are guided by policy that we have to meetLSP has defined processes that we need to followWe can and should adjust our role within the policy and processes
- #37 We confirmed the need to adjust our role to the many unique elements of a given mission.The mission manager must adapt to the unique mission.
- #38 Finally, we reminded ourselves of the various stakeholders and roles needed to deliver a solution/mission. We made explicit our assumptions about roles and responsibilities.
- #39 During our final session, we also conducted lessons learned on the process.
- #40 We identified a set of lessons learned on our effort