1. How Much is Enough?
Applying the Discipline of
Systems Engineering to
Small, Fast-Paced Projects
NASA Project Management Challenge 2007
Michael Hazen
Jacobs Engineering

2. Safety Moment
Little things can cause big problems
“True Systems Engineering is about minimizing
the unintended consequences of a design”
– Michael Griffin, NASA PM Challenge 2006
2

3. Agenda
Small Fast-Paced Project Description
How Much Systems Engineering is Enough??
Too Much??
Methodology & Enablers
JSC Initiatives and Case Studies
Discussion
3

4. Small Fast-Paced Project Attributes
Typically one person will wear several hats
No time to philosophize on potential methodologies
once the project is kicked off
No money for anything that is not essential and
explicitly required
These attributes often apply to larger scale projects
4

5. Systems Engineering Attributes
Broad variations in what Systems Engineering and
Systems Engineers are perceived to be.
Book manager, collection of tools, project team “visitor”?
http://www.incose.org/atlanta/Library/Presentations/Why_SE_Doesnt_Work.ppt
Michael Griffin comments
Project Management and Systems Engineering are opposite
sides of the same coin. Systems Engineering must be the
technical conscience of the program.
Lead systems engineers must not be too busy to look at the
big picture.
5

6. Systems Engineering
NPR 7123.1 NASA Systems Engineering Processes and
Requirements
Systems engineering at NASA requires the application of a
systematic, disciplined engineering approach that is quantifiable,
recursive, iterative, and repeatable for the development,
operation, maintenance, and disposal of systems; integrated into
a whole throughout the life cycle of a project or program. The
emphasis of systems engineering is on safely achieving
stakeholder, functional, physical, and operational performance
requirements in the intended use environments over the system's
planned life within cost and schedule constraints.
http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayDir.cfm?Internal_ID=N_PR_7
123_0001_&page_name=Chapter1
6

7. How Much is Enough??
KEY POINT: “How much is enough?” should
focus on HOW you address SE process
elements as opposed to IF you will address these
elements.
7

8. NPR 7123.1 SE Engine
http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayDir.cfm?Internal_ID=N_PR_7123_0001_&page_name=Chapter3 8

9. Systems engineering is a fractal process
The systems engineering
process is applied at levels of
greater and greater detail. It is
applied to the system, then to
the subsystems, then to the
components, etc. Similarly
for the fractal pattern on the
right, the same algorithm was
applied at the large structural
level, then at the medium-
scale level, then at the fine-
detail level, etc.
http://www.sie.arizona.edu/sysengr/ 9

10. The Pirates Code
“Everything has to be adapted to the project of
interest”
Dr. Joel Sercel, Director of Caltech’s Laboratory for
Spacecraft and Mission Design
10

11. Methodology
Can I afford systems engineering?
Organizational prerequisites
Enablers you can use now
11

12. Organizational Prerequisites
Know your SE Process(es)
Characterize YOUR small fast paced projects
Decide in advance (before the clock starts
ticking) how you plan to execute Systems
Engineering on small projects (pre-tailor your
processes)
12

13. Small, fast-paced project definition
http://cio.energy.gov/documents/SEM3_1231.pdf
13

14. Process Tailoring Examples
Adapting the lifecycle (exhibit 2.2-1, p. 30)
Specifying (in advance) work products required for specific project sizes
Planning (Exhibit 3.0-1, p. 51)
Requirements Definition (Exhibit 4.0-1, p. 114)
Functional Analysis (Exhibit 5.0-1, p. 157)
System Design (Exhibit 6.0-1, p. 192)
Construction (Exhibit 7.0-1, p. 223)
Integration and Test (Exhibit 8.0-1, p. 249)
Installation and Acceptance (Exhibit 9.0-1, p. 262)
Tailoring example (Exhibit 2.4-1, p. 41)
http://cio.energy.gov/documents/SEM3_1231.pdf
14

15. 15

16. 16

17. Enablers you can use now
17

18. NPR 7123.1 Checklists
Two checklists (entrance criteria and success criteria)
provided for major milestone reviews:
Mission Concept Test Readiness
Systems Requirements System Acceptance
Mission Definition Flight Readiness
System Definition Operational Readiness
Preliminary Design Decommissioning
Critical Design
http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayDir.cfm?Internal_ID=N_
PR_7123_0001_&page_name=AppendixG
18

19. Tips
Can start using these checklists anywhere in the
lifecycle.
To get away from vague “yes” answers to each
question, add columns to record the specific product /
deliverable associated with the yes and another column
for completeness / maturity.
Readiness reviews (based on the NPR 7123.1
checklists) a few weeks before an actual lifecycle review
can make a big difference in the success of the review.
Do not make the checklist a “surprise”. Make sure
projects know what they should be considering during
each life cycle phase.
19

20. Entry Checklist Usage Example
Checklist Item Yes / Project Manager Reviewer
No comments/ specific Comments
location of
technical products
1. Successful completion of the MCR (Mission Concept Review)
and responses made to all RIDS (Review Item Dispositions).
2. A preliminary SRR agenda, success criteria, and charge to the
board have been agreed to by the technical team, project
manager, and review chair prior to the SRR.
3. The following technical products for hardware and software
system elements are available to the cognizant participants prior
to the review:
a. System Architecture.
b. System requirements document.
c. System software functionality description.
d. Updated concept of operations.
e. Updated mission requirements, if applicable.
f. Baselined Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP).
g. Preliminary system requirements allocation to the next lower
level system.
20

21. Success Checklist Usage Example
SDR Success Criteria Project Manager Reviewer Comments
Comments/
Identification of
Yes related technical
/ No products
1. The detailed design is Yes We have Audio quality is a concern. PM says
expected to meet the demonstrated a the pre-mod audio quality was poor.
requirements with adequate prototype to the end No plans to assess.
margins at an acceptable level customer (ES) who
of risk. was pleased with the
results.
2. Interface control documents Yes Interfaces for the ULD Color coding of cable connectors is
are appropriately matured to and Camcorder still TBD (not yet called out on
proceed with fabrication, are well defined. drawings). System can be plugged in
assembly, integration and test, backwards & performance of
and plans are in place to backwards system is an unknown. No
manage any open items plans to investigate - just try to make
it obvious what the right connectivity
is.
3. High confidence exists in the Yes Not clear from documentation that we
product baseline, and adequate are building six units (4 to fly & 2
documentation exists and/or for training).
will exist in a timely manner to
allow proceeding with
fabrication, assembly,
integration, and test.
21

22. Other Key Enablers
Stakeholder Support
Customer Collaboration
Project management process flexibility
Organizational Maturity (Discipline to do what
needs to be done)
Focused Peer Reviews (Plan to DO it right, not
to see IF you DID it right)
22

23. Focused Peer Reviews
JSC Avionics Systems Division Inspection Process
Focused Checklist developed directly from Document
Template or Standard
Moderator & small team
Review is 2 hours max (deliverables for larger projects
may require more than one review)
Typical prep time for each reviewer is no longer than
the scheduled review duration.
Reviewers must have at least 5 working days to review
material.
Author responsible for disposition of identified defects
23

24. Typical ASD Inspection Checklist
24

25. CASE Studies
TRAD (Tile Repair Ablator Dispenser) SDR
25

26. Other Case Studies
Compound Specific Analyzer – Combustion
Products (CSA-CP) SRR
Regenerative Environmental Control and Life
Support Fluid Hoses (REFH) PDR/CDR
Ultrasonic Leak Detector Impedance Adapter
Cable (ULDIAC) PDR/CDR
ORU Temporary Stowage Device (OTSD) CDR
Digital EVA/IVA camera SAR
26

27. What next?
Identify your SE process (NPR 7123.1?)
Pre-Tailoring for Small Fast Paced Projects
(visit this BEFORE the Project starts)
‘Project specific’ tailoring (within predefined
constraints) – Pirates Code
Application of proven high Return-On-
Investment techniques.
27

28. Questions?
Contact Information
Michael Hazen
Jacobs Engineering
JSC Engineering and Science Contract
281-461-5797
michael.hazen@escg.jacobs.com
28