calder jones
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 1February 7 2007
Gravity Probe B: Lessons from a Management Study
Brad JonesJohnson Space Center (formerly Stanford University)
&Ned Calder
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
“Always be suspicious of news you want to hear.”– Francis Everitt, Stanford University ~ GP-B Principal Investigator
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 2February 7 2007
How Einstein Got Physics Out of Two Problems & into a Third!
• Special Relativity (1905) -- very well tested– Reconciled Maxwell’s 1865 electromagnetics with Newton’s
mechanics by changing Newton’s theory at high speeds – “E = mc2” comes from special relativity
• General Relativity (1916) -- very incompletely tested– Einstein’s theory of gravity
– Solved inconsistency between special relativity and Newton’s theory of gravity by replacing Newton’s force with curved space-time
• The fix Einstein landed us in -- unsolved after 90 years!– General relativity can’t be reconciled with quantum mechanics -- our
theory of atoms and elementary particles
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 3February 7 2007
Purpose of Gravity Probe B
• To measure with respect to framework of distant Universe, two tiny drift effects on gyros in orbit around the Earth– geodetic 6,614.4 mas/yr– frame-dragging 42.0 mas/yr
• Effects predicted by Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity
• 1 mas (milliarc second) = width of human hair seen at 10 miles
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 4February 7 2007
Management Study Overview• Project Purpose: To examine the
impact and effectiveness of having a university prime contractor on a large scale NASA program
• Project Objective: Extract a set of best practices for managing NASA-University-Industry relationships
• Research Conducted with Over 40 Interviews:– Stanford University– NASA Marshall Space Flight Center– NASA Headquarters– Lockheed Martin (Sunnyvale & Palo
Alto)– NASA Kennedy Space Center @
Vandenberg Air Force Base– Independent Review Team
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 5February 7 2007
Why GP-B?• GP-B was a perfect case study
because…– One of the first programs with a
university prime“How did it work out?”
– NASA-University-Industry all represented
– Technical complexity stressed the management environment
– One of NASA’s longest mission“What took so long?”
• Management Experiment– Originated in 1985 from a comment
by then NASA Administrator Mr. James Beggs :GP-B will be an interesting management experiment in addition to an interesting scientific experiment.
– Vast difference of opinion on success of the Management Experiment
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 6February 7 2007
Best Practices Summary1. Organizational Asymmetries – Strategically leveraging
capability asymmetries while managing cultural differences.2. Contextual Transitions – Recognizing and managing
transition points when programmatic requirements and processes change significantly.
3. Adaptive Program Management – Recognizing the need for emphasis on different aspects of the program management’s competencies at different stages of the program life cycle.
4. ‘Aerospace Knowledge’ at Universities – Establishing the importance for the university to acquire aerospace experience and for NASA to ensure that key personnel are treated as investments as opposed to costs.
5. Managing Risk – Providing proper oversight for the unique management challenges encountered on university programs through the use of risk management techniques.
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 7February 7 2007
Organizational Asymmetries
-Hierarchical-Mission focus
-Flat -Knowledge focusEnvironment
-Radical Innovation-Efficient
-Individuality-Informal-Entrepreneurial
Universities
-Incremental Innovation-System/ProcessCapability
-Teamwork-Formal-Cost conscious
Culture
Industry/Government
Leveraging Capability Differences and Managing Cultural Differences:
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 8February 7 2007
Organizational Asymmetries
-Hierarchical-Formal
-Flat -InformalEnvironment
-Radical Innovation-Efficiency
-Focus on Individuality-Focus on Knowledge-Entrepreneurial
Universities
-Incremental Innovation-System/ProcessCapability
-Focus on Team Work-Focus on CostCulture
Industry/Government
Leveraging Capability Differences and Managing Cultural Differences:
NASA MSFC: “It was extremely difficult to get the university personnel to stop tinkering and start producing.”
SU: “Lockheed is only out to make a profit!”
NASA HQ: “Universities excel at radical innovation – something industry generally lacks.”
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 9February 7 2007
• Facilitators with understanding of the cultural, capability, andprocess differences between the collaborating organizations.
• Either substantial previous experience with each organization ordevelop needed skills on the job.
• Boundary agents developed through exchanging team members
Boundary Spanning Agents
University
Organizational/Knowledge Boundary
NASABoundary
Agent
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 10February 7 2007
Contextual Transitions
Phase A:Preliminary Analysis
Phase B:Definition
Phase C:Design
Phase D:Development
Phase E:OperationsNASA Definition:
NASA Guided
PI & Scientist LedAerospace
ManagementLed
GP-B ManagementDivision:
ScientistLed
Aerospace Management
Led
Management ExperimentContextual Transition:Procurement of Flight Hardware
Conceptual Definition, Technology Development, Specification Development & Innovation
Hardware Development, Integration, & Testing
Science ProgramDefinition:
Contextual TransitionManagement Division:
Led by PI or PM with Strong Science Technology Background
Led by PM with Strong Aerospace Management
Background
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 11February 7 2007
Adaptive Program ManagementM
anag
eria
l Abi
lity
Science Technical A
bilityHigh
HighLow
Low
Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase D Phase E
Procurement ofFlight HW
Potential ProgramManagement Shift(s)
Launch
• Multi-Talented Program Manager (Sci. & Mgmt.) may not require any changes• Critical for NASA to make university aware of the potential management shift early• Management team should embody relevant competencies not just the Program Manager
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 12February 7 2007
Adaptive Program ManagementM
anag
eria
l Abi
lity
Science Technical A
bilityHigh
HighLow
Low
Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase D Phase E
Procurement ofFlight HW
Potential ProgramManagement Shift(s)
Launch
• Multi-Talented Program Manager (Sci. & Mgmt.) may not require any changes• Critical for NASA to make university aware of the potential management shift early• Management team should embody relevant competencies not just the Program Manager
LM: “There was a substantial period of time where Stanford’s management didn’t appear to know how to complete a space program.”
NASA MSFC: “Lockheed over-powered Stanford’s contract management capabilities.”
IRT: “At one point, it was recommended that LM become the prime since they had experience developing spacecraft.”
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 13February 7 2007
Implementing/Maintaining Aerospace Knowledge
Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase D Phase E
Procurement ofFlight HW
Launch
Uni
vers
ity O
pera
tions
Invo
lvin
g A
eros
pace
Pr
actic
es (%
)
100%
50%
15%Maintain AerospaceExperience at University
Gravity Probe B
Ideal Transition
• Implementation too early impairs productivity, while too late leads to ineffectiveness and rejection
• NASA needs to conduct early training sessions on procedure writing, quality assurance, part tracking, etc. for university employees to aid in an efficient transition.
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 14February 7 2007
Implementing/Maintaining Aerospace Knowledge
Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase D Phase E
Procurement ofFlight HW
Launch
Uni
vers
ity O
pera
tions
Invo
lvin
g A
eros
pace
Pr
actic
es (%
)
100%
50%
15%Maintain AerospaceExperience at University
Gravity Probe B
Ideal Transition
• Implementation too early impairs productivity, while too late leads to ineffectiveness and rejection
• NASA needs to conduct early training sessions on procedure writing, quality assurance, part tracking, etc. for university employees to aid in an efficient transition.
SU: “It took us awhile, but in the end we had a very competent team, in terms of ability to build flight hardware.”
NASA MSFC: “SU was testing flight HW without test procedures, by the end they were as savvy as any contractor at utilizing aerospace processes.”
NASA HQ: “Stanford doesn’t realize the resources it has developed.”
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 15February 7 2007
Efficiently Managing Risk
Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase D Phase E
Procurement ofFlight HW Launch
NA
SA S
uppo
rt
High
Low
Not Necessarily HighNumber of Personnel
Note: Actual Number ofPersonnel Based onRisk Management
GP-B NASA Support
Ideal NASA Support
Risk ManagementSystem Implemented
• Overwhelming positive response by all organizations on effectiveness of the system• Implement risk management system early to aid management• Avoid: Man-loading & fluctuating personnel
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 16February 7 2007
Efficiently Managing Risk
Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase D Phase E
Procurement ofFlight HW Launch
NA
SA S
uppo
rt
High
Low
Not Necessarily HighNumber of Personnel
Note: Actual Number ofPersonnel Based onRisk Management
GP-B NASA Support
Ideal NASA Support
Risk ManagementSystem Implemented
• Overwhelming positive response by all organizations on effectiveness of the system• Implement risk management system early to aid management• Avoid: Man-loading & fluctuating personnel
NASA MSFC: “After the risk system was introduced, the relationship felt much more like a partnership.”
SU: “The new approach to risk management really helped us work with Marshall to identify what the real concerns were.”
LM: “The risk system provided us the ability to gauge NASA’s response to any situation.”
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 17February 7 2007
Implementation and Other Applications• Implementation of these practices
is a joint effortPartnershipMutual awareness and understanding at all levelsNASA should provide leadership, but universities must have autonomy
• Other ApplicationsResults can be generalized to situations that:
• Involve organizational asymmetries• Involve contextual transitions
Examples• Center-to-Center collaboration• Internal NASA development programs
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 18February 7 2007
Backup Slides
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 19February 7 2007
Justification for University Prime Contractors
• Interdependent space vehicle – Science payload must be a
significant portion of overall vehicle development
• Novel, path-dependant technology development– Specifications depend on
development– Exploit university capabilities
• Program management capability– Aerospace processes– Risk management
Gravity Probe B
LISA
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 20February 7 2007
GP-B
Thruster
Thruster
ProbeTelescope
(inside)
Quartz Block Assembly (inside)Dewar
Telescope Quartz Block Assembly
SENSOR(Payload)CONTROLLER
(Payload/Spacecraft)ACTUATOR(Spacecraft)
• Interdependent Payload and Spacecraft• Path-dependent development process, integrated spec derivation • High-level of novel technology development
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 21February 7 2007
GP-B: The Main Systems
Gyroscope Telescope Science Instrument
Cryogenic Probe Payload Space Vehicle
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 22February 7 2007
Operations2004~2010
Apr. 2004. GPB launch
July 2004.End IOC
Sept. 2005. End SM
2006. Publishresults, end NAS8-39225
2005-2010.Potential for further GPB experiments
2010. End battery life
Development1993-2003
1995. NASA says go directly to flight, begin contractNAS8-39225, STU ends
1990-1991. FIST
1991-1994. GTU-0
1994-1995. GTU-1
1996. End NAS8-36125
1997. GTU-2
1999. PL Test 1
2000. PL Test 2
2001. PL integrated with spacecraft
2002. SV Acoustic & Thermal VacTests
2003. SV moved to VAFB
Conceptual Definition and Design1959-1983
1959. Conceptually realized (Beginning of GPB)
1961. First contact with NASA
1964. NASA grant begins, retroactive 1963
1977. End NASA grant
Shuttle Test1984-1992
1984. Begin STORE
1985. Begin contractNAS8-36125
1986. Challenger accident, STORE becomes GPB Tech
1990. STU begins
Gravity Probe B: Technological Development
1959 2000 2010
100% Space Vehicle Usable
0%
Funding(Million $)
0
70
60
40
2019801970 1990
Launch
End SM
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 23February 7 2007
Risk Management System
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 24February 7 2007
Risk Management System Cont’d
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 25February 7 2007
Where Does NASA Go From Here?• Conclusions
– NASA should concentrate early & continuously on:• Foster collaborative, not contractor, relationships• Implement management best practices• Provide oversight through risk management techniques
– Develop a set of guidelines for universities– When certain criteria present, universities are the
prudent choice as prime contractor• Limitations
– Single organizational arrangement– Single academic institution– Idiosyncrasies of GP-B
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 26February 7 2007
Benefits of Stanford University
• Practical Aerospace Training– Aerospace Project Management Experience– Spacecraft Development & Flight Experienced Personnel
Trained by NASA– Excellent Facilities Including a Flight Proven Mission Operations
Center (MOC)• Technology Advancement Capabilities
– Proven Research Capabilities & Technology Advances– One of a Kind Teaming & Collaboration between Engineering &
Science Departments – Nationally Ranked Programs in Science, Engineering, &
Business Perfect Formula for Successful Collaboration
Gravity Probe B • A Management Study STANFORD•
Calder-Jones - 27February 7 2007
About the Authors
Ned CalderResearch Scientist Massachusetts Institute of [email protected]
GP-B Experience:– Technical liaison and cryogenics
specialist Education:
– M.S. Technology and Policy Massachusetts Institute of Technology
– B.S. PhysicsNorthwestern University
Brad JonesPayload Safety Engineer Johnson Space [email protected] (work)650-278-0928 (cell)
GP-B Experience:– Flight director and launch
team leadEducation:
– M.S. (in progress) Aero/AstroStanford University
– M.E. Management and Systems EngineeringCornell University
– B.S. Civil EngineeringTexas A&M University