Prepared to Launch: Growing up PM at NASA

The First Three Of Six Criteria That Each NASA Project Manager Must Know

“There is one other thing we should discuss, and that is the difference between management and leadership.  Management is figuring out how to get the job done.  Leadership is deciding what needs to be done and inspiring the team to get where you want to go.”  

- Program Manager, JSC

In my last blog, I discussed Project Oversight (a missing chapter in the PMBOK guide?). And, I left you with the intimidating “rule” from the Project and Program Handbook: 

“THE PROJECT MANAGER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANNING AND SUPPORTING THESE (Project) REVIEWS.”

The Project Manager must present six assessment criteria for consideration and review. They are large meetings and once scheduled are never delayed, and never excused. The reviews will happen, and the Project Manager is responsible for the majority of the information to be presented. There is flexibility as to the timing, number and information to be stressed in each review.

I strongly believe that the six project criteria the NASA PM is responsible for addressing - makes sense for all industries and all projects – regardless of size or complexity.  They aren’t a part of NASA practice because they were NASA projects.  They are a part of NASA practice – because they are good common sense.  And, they should apply for nearly every company. 

From a NASA standard (7120D): “There are three reasons for conducting Independent Life Cycle Reviews: first, we want the program/project to receive independent assurance that they are doing the right thing; second, NASA senior management needs to understand that the program/project is on the right track, is performing according to plan, and that externally-imposed impediments to its success are being removed; and third, the Agency needs to provide our external stakeholders assurance we are doing the right thing.”

These reviews are also what I like to refer to these reviews as “PM school.”  It’s where each Project Manager learns what is expected of them, how powerful a position they actually have and best of all – help from more experienced managers, academic experts and other stakeholders.  

PROJECT PHASES

At the top level, program and project life cycles are divided into three phases: Concept, Formulation and Implementation.   The formal project reviews don’t start until the project passes a conceptual study review - (MCR or Mission Concept Review) and enters the formulation stage where requirements are further developed, refined and reviewed.   While these are slightly different words than PMI uses in the PMBOK® and other documents, the concepts are very similar – if not identical.

Above is a high-level diagram of the project life-cycle, I’ll describe the components of this life-cycle model in greater detail in a later blog.  But for now, I’m focusing on the “PM School” or project reviews.  As stated in the NASA standard, “These reviews are essential elements of conducting, managing, evaluating, and approving space flight projects.” 

WHO ATTENDS THESE REVIEWS?

The short answer is: stakeholders.  But it’s a carefully selected mix of stakeholders.  One interesting aspect is the inclusion of a “The Standing Review Board.”  They are a group of independent experts whose role is to “assess and evaluate project activities, advise projects and report their evaluations to the responsible organizations.”  They are responsible for conducting independent reviews of projects and providing objective, expert judgments to both the Project Manager and to upper management.

I can tell you from personal experience, they are smart, quick-witted, incisive and not hesitant to point out what they think is a problem in a Project Manager’s efforts or plans.   The goal is not to punish the project manager, but to ensure that everything that can be reasonably done to insure project success IS being done. 

Reviews are a big deal, a stressful time for a Project Manager, and a truly wonderful learning experience. You can absorb the thinking of experts from many fields – learn what they are looking for, learn what worries them, and continually improve your project management skills.

As I promised at the start, we’ll cover the first 3 of the 6 important areas covered during the reviews.  Each of these can be taken to a MUCH, MUCH deeper dive by the review group.  I’m only listing the high level view of each.

1. Alignment with Agency strategic goals – does this project “fit” within the overall strategic goals set by the agency? 

• Project requirements and constraints – Have the requirements that the project is planned to meet been well defined?  Are they complete, consistent, traceable to an overall mission or need, are they unambiguous (facts not opinions), what is each requirements relative importance and can they be verified once completed?
• Mission needs and success criteria
• Allocation of program requirements to projects
• Proactive management of changes in project scope and shortfalls

2. Adequacy of management approach - Do you have a project management approach that makes sense and the group believes will work? 

• Project authorization
• Management framework and plans
• Acquisition strategies
• Internal and external agreements

3. Adequacy of technical approach and success criteria

• Flow down of project requirements to systems/subsystems architecture and design
• Operations concepts that respond to and satisfy the requirements and mission needs

DOES THE PROJECT MANGER GET YELLED AT?

NO!  The goal is not to attack the work the Project Team has done.  The goal is to make sure that everyone is informed of the status and plans of the project.  Sometimes, mistakes will be discovered and that’s a good thing!  That’s what the review is all about.

It's about trying to do things right the first time, to uncover all of the potential roadblocks and keeping everyone informed. 

“Projects are the means by which NASA explores space, expands scientific knowledge, and performs research on behalf of the nation” – NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Handbook.  http://go.nasa.gov/1QPkK8Z (Free download)

Project Categorization

Not all projects at NASA are huge.  Many are actually very small.  As the handbook says, projects “Vary in scope and complexity and require varying levels of oversight (notice the key word OVERSIGHT).  They are assigned a category based upon

1. The project life-cycle cost estimate
2. The inclusion of radioactive material
3. If the system being developed is for human space flight

Personally, I never worked with a product of a project that had radioactive material included.  But the other two categories – I have grown up in, work on and managed.  

How are Projects Prioritized?

The first and absolute primary consideration is if the product of the project will be used for HUMAN spaceflight.  That criteria out rules all others.  Then the life-cycle costs are considered.  It’s not the total in-house cost of the project that determines the degree of oversite, it’s the cost of design, acquisition of components, assembly, then putting the project’s product in the field and maintaining it.    A PM’s first project will be small.  But thrilling none the less.  A young PM is subjected to all of the scrutiny and oversight that the most critical projects are.

The Value of Oversight (Standardized Reviews)

As the NASA project standard states: “These reviews are essential elements of conducting, managing, evaluating and approving space flight projects.”  They are a combination of a marvelous learning environment and a way to ensure that each component of the project plan has been reviewed, understood and exposed to scrutiny.

To make sure all aspects of your project are reviewed, a “Standing Review Board” is brought in.  This is a group of independent experts who assess and evaluate project activities, advise project managers and report their evaluations to the responsible organizations.  They conduct independent reviews of a project and providing objective, expert judgments.   

I freely admit that at first, it’s very scary to stand up in front of an auditorium of 100 plus experts and review your project’s “Magic 6” criteria.  But after a while it becomes an adventure.   I’ve told many people, that at first these standardized reviews feel like “Throw stones at Dave” time.  But it wasn’t! Everyone was being constructive, lending their expertise and trying to help all of us succeed.  With a large, experienced and expert audience, you can get concerns expressed that you would NEVER, EVER have thought of as a project team. 

What is the value of these reviews?

The reviews provide the project (team) with an independent assessment of their plans, goals, techniques and risk assessment.  EVERY AREA is open for inspection. 

They provide NASA senior management with an understanding of whether:

• The project is on track to meet objectives
• The project is performing according to plan
• Impediments to project success are addressed

The PMBOK Guide

This type of standardized review is missing from the PMBOK guide (V5), but I wish they weren’t.  A disciplined system of peer reviews, system reviews and reviews by experts may seem expensive, but are a great stakeholder communication tool, a project team communication tool and team-building exercise as well as insuring you’re doing the job to the best of your ability.

NASA doesn't use the word "Portfolio" as PMI does, but divides large efforts into "Mission Directorates." There are:

- Aeronautics Research

• NASA's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate works to solve the challenges that still exist in our nation's air transportation system: air traffic congestion, safety and environmental impacts.

- Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate

• The Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate provides the Agency with leadership and management of NASA space operations related to human exploration in and beyond Low-Earth orbit.  (MY PERSONAL FAVORITE!)

- Science

• NASA's Science Mission Directorate and the nation's science community use space observatories to conduct scientific studies of the Earth from space to visit and return samples from other bodies in the solar system, and to peer out into our Galaxy and beyond.

- Space Technology

• The Space Technology Mission Directorate is responsible for developing the crosscutting, pioneering, new technologies and capabilities needed to achieve NASA's current and future missions.

Below the directorates are Programs (such as the Shuttle), then Projects. The projects vary greatly in size and complexity and require different levels of oversight. Each project is assigned a category based upon:

PROJECT AND PROGRAM OVERSIGHT

Oversight came in the form of *REQUIRED* standardized reviews, peer reviews and many others. Most interesting to Project Management are the project life-cycle reviews. These reviews are essential elements of conducting, managing, evaluating, and approving space flight projects 

These reviews were HUGE affairs. Hundreds of attendees would appear to listen to the humble Project Manager present their status. The attendees included a group of independent experts who assess and evaluate project activities, advise projects and report their evaluations to the responsible organizations. They are responsible for conducting independent reviews of a project and providing objective, expert judgments.

These reviews could become very stressful for the PM. I've known people to "crack" under the pressure. But the purpose was not to stress the Project Manager it was to explore every area of the project and point out weaknesses, strengths, risks and more. I think of it as "PM School." After years of standing up to an auditorium-sized audience getting questions from experts in their fields, a PM becomes VERY GOOD at what they do. 

THE PROJECT MANAGER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANNING AND SUPPORTING THESE REVIEWS.

And, must present six assessment criteria for consideration and review. 

More on that later. 

-- Dave