1、Lessons Learned Entry: 1366Lesson Info:a71 Lesson Number: 1366a71 Lesson Date: 2003-01-01a71 Submitting Organization: ARCa71 Submitted by: Donald R. MendozaSubject: Risk Management: Lack of a Formal Proposal or New Business Case Review Process Abstract: All Centers should have a process for reviewin
2、g and approving proposals and new business cases. This process should include participation from all levels of Center line and project management and support organizations (Offices of the Chief Engineer, Scientist, System Safety and Quality Assurance, Systems Management, and Business Development). I
3、n the process should have a tailored set of requirements such that the appropriate level of rigor can be applied to each case (i.e. thresholds based on funding requirements, visibility, safety, partnering, and security).Description of Driving Event: The Project was required to develop and deliver a
4、major scientific instrument to the Stratostrophic Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) Program. However, the team was predominately made up by research scientists and engineers such that most of their planning and management experience had been gained while working on academic type activities
5、in which the main deliverables were data and research publications. While several members did have experience with other instruments, including a similar one used on SOFIAs predecessor, they had never developed an instrument of the required size nor had they developed anything requiring FAA flight c
6、ertification. Thus there were significant knowledge gaps that were not addressed in the Projects original proposal. The situation was made worse by the fact that the Projects managing organizations (from the Branch to Center level) did not have standardized processes for reviewing and approving prop
7、osals. Additionally, the proposal submission checks and balances that did exist were weakened because of time constraints and personnel availability (the proposal was submitted for Center approval late on a Friday with key personnel on vacation). Consequently while the original proposal identified m
8、ajor technical risks and described corresponding risk mitigation plans, it did not have adequate Center support/oversight to aid the risk reduction process, especially in the programmatic (schedule and budget) area. Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license
9、 from IHS-,-,-As a result, the Project operated in a reactionary mode rather than a strategic one and was cancelled after it became clear it was not going to meet its programmatic requirements within a reasonably enlarged budget. Lesson(s) Learned: Failing to submit proposals and new business cases
10、to a formal review and approval process will have significant negative consequences, including an unnecessarily high risk of failure during project implementation and the lack of Center support when required. Therefore, a formal proposal or new business case review process is required to ensure: 1.
11、A proposals content is appropriately aligned with Program, Center, and Agency goals.2. A proposals planned budget and schedule are compatible with its scope.3. The Center has the resources, facilities, logistics and most importantly the commitment necessary to support the projects implementation.4.
12、A proposal contains sufficient information to transition into Project planning and implementation.5. That the Project will have adequate sponsorship, support, recognition, advocacy, and ownership when needed.Recommendation(s): 1. All Centers should have a process for reviewing and approving proposal
13、s and new business cases. This process should be incorporated into the Centers existing Business Management System and include participation from all levels of Center line and project management and support organizations (Offices of the Chief Engineer, Scientist, System Safety and Quality Assurance,
14、 Systems Management, and Business Development). In addition to addressing all the points made in the previous section (Lessons Learned) the process should have a tailored set of requirements such that the appropriate level of rigor can be applied to each case (i.e. thresholds based on funding requir
15、ements, visibility, safety, partnering, security). Metrics should also be used to adjust the process based on the success/failure of proposal acceptance and their subsequent implementation. Thus, the process can be applied in an efficient and effective manner.2. Evidence of Recurrence Control Effect
16、iveness: The ARC Space Science Directorate wrote and implemented a formal process for reviewing and approving proposals and new business cases. This process (New Business Review, 53.S.0001.1) has been incorporated into the Directorates Quality Management System and can be viewed at https:/postdoc.ar
17、c.nasa.gov/postdoc/s/folder.ehtml?url_id=17844&nocache=1. Experience with this process Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-has been positive, as proposals going through it have avoided many of the pitfalls of the Project in question. Howe
18、ver, as the process is only at the Directorate level, there are some issues involving adequate support from other Center organizations that are being worked.Documents Related to Lesson: NPG 7120.5Mission Directorate(s): a71 Exploration Systemsa71 Sciencea71 Space Operationsa71 Aeronautics ResearchAd
19、ditional Key Phrase(s): a71 Administration/Organizationa71 Policy & Planninga71 Program and Project Managementa71 Risk Management/AssessmentAdditional Info: Approval Info: a71 Approval Date: 2003-09-29a71 Approval Name: Andrew Hockera71 Approval Organization: ARCa71 Approval Phone Number: 650-604-4120Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-
