Engineering topics

Geraldine Robbins

Publications and source records attributed to Geraldine Robbins.

3 records

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dissertation Defense: Three Papers on Organizational Decision-Making and Change at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

This is a three-paper dissertation that responds to a call for empirical research on stakeholder influence in the implementation of evaluation recommendations. The literature is consistent but mostly theoretical: stakeholder participation should positively influence and increase the probability of implementation (see e.g., Christie, 2011; Cousins & Earl, 1992; Fetterman, 2004). In response, I use two Goddard Space Flight Center engineering technical training and development programs to build a causal argument supporting my proposition that stakeholder influence in the logic modeling process impacts organizational decision-making and change. I first introduce the logic modeling process as a tool to involve stakeholders in program and evaluation design (paper 1); then use the data collection process to implement the collaboratively constructed logic model outcomes (paper 2); and, finally, I triangulate the data using the Toal (2009) Evaluation Involvement Scale (paper 3). I do this to “increase the validity of the findings” (Noble & Heale, 2019, p. 67) and to garner potential mechanisms. I found that stakeholder participation in the logic modeling process positively influenced the use of data to inform recommendations which in turn positively influenced implementation of evaluation recommendations. I identified the process itself as the mechanism and the key decision points as links or influencers. Potential factors included power and interest (measured by role) and time-on-job.

organizational decision-making↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lessons Learned from NASA Goddard Space Flight Center’s Product Development Lead Training Schedule and Cost Development Workshop: Continuous Improvement

This presentation provides a status of the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) effort to increase foundational knowledge of Product Development Leads (PDLs) in schedule and cost management including earned value management (EVM). In 2012, GSFC’s Engineering and Technology Directorate (ETD) implemented an in-house training program to prepare PDLs for managing the technical, cost, schedule, and risk aspects of spaceflight systems to meet their subsystem commitments. Developed in-house, the PDL training program provides an integrated approach to requirements development, risk, schedule and cost management, EVM, performance tracking, and other areas. The program has been held twice yearly since its inception with 531 participating and 451 completing the curriculum. In 2017, the program won the Robert H. Goddard award for Quality and Process Improvement. Program development and evolution were presented in the 2018 NASA Schedule and Cost Symposium. The presentation was so well received that this year we focus on one workshop within the program: Schedule and Cost Development, including EVM. We examine the on-going logic modeling process and how participant and stakeholder data influence workshop content and design, and how the disciplines of schedule and cost contribute to mission success. In this presentation we refresh you on how the approach integrates lecture, small group discussion, estimating, case study exercises, and problem solving. We update you on the data collected from participants and stakeholders, and we discuss how we use these data to measure training effectiveness. Specific topics include: • How the logic model is used as the backbone for continuous program improvement, • How feedback influences implementation and curriculum updates, • How data collection and analysis inform workshop content and development, including participant discoveries of EVM data, • How including the resource analyst and planner in the product development team supports project success.

Lessons Learned↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NICS (NASA Instrument Capabilities Study) Instrument Schedule and Cost Study

This paper summarizes work performed on the Flight Projects Directorate Planetary Science Projects Division (PSPD, Code 430) NICS (NASA Instrument Capabilities study) instrument schedule and cost study. Included are a short summary of the original NICS (NASA, 2008), and the design and approach, data collection, analysis, preliminary findings and recommendations from select areas of the current study. The NICS (2008) was chartered by then NASA Chief Engineer Michael Ryschkewitsch and chaired by Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) engineer, John Leon. The focus was to identify problem areas in instrument development and, if possible, to offer solutions. In the area of instrument developments, the NICS (2008) identified a lack of resources and authority to successfully manage to instrument cost and schedule requirements; and a lack of critical skills, expertise, and leadership to successfully implement unique (one-of-a-kind) high technology developments (NASA, 2008, pp. 51, 52). Additionally, the NICS (2008) found problems in requirements formulation, reviews and management; unrealistic caps and overly optimistic estimates; and externally directed changes which increased the likelihood of overrunning cost and schedule (NASA, 2008, pp.53, 54). It is noteworthy that NICS findings are consistent with previous studies at the mission level (Robbins, Schmidt & White, 2020). Five years later in 2013, the Instrument Projects Division (IPD) was established to implement and manage instrument projects greater than $20M. The IPD was known as Code 490. Its structure incorporated several of the NICS (2008) recommendations. To see if these incorporated recommendations made a difference, and to identify other potential challenges in instrument developments, two parallel studies were initiated. Originally led by the IPD, now led by the PSPD, and the Instrument and Payload Systems Engineering Branch (IPSE, Code 592), respectively, the instrument schedule and cost study and the instrument technical complexity study began in 2017. Data collection was initiated in 2020 and is on-going. This paper is limited to the IPD/PSPD study. Among other findings, preliminary data indicate IPD/PSPD project management support positively influenced instrument development as related to providing a dedicated level of support staff, including a deputy Instrument Project Manager (dIPM), reducing IPM leadership changes, and providing other project support. Next steps include continued data collection and analysis, and mapping to technical complexity data.

NICS implementation↗