Developing a Strategic Approach to Knowledge Management
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Knowledge Management strategic plan knowledge arch↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Knowledge Management strategic plan knowledge architecture IT architecture”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Standards Roadmapping for Mission Assurance in Commercial Spaceflight
This paper explores the application of established roadmapping approaches in standards planning and roadmap development to support mission assurance objectives. Mission assurance requires proactive planning across multiple domains including technical, schedule, cost, organizational, and policy. The intersection of these domains happens at the enterprise level, and enterprise systems engineering processes can systematically guide mission assurance activities, including development of standards roadmaps. Standards planning and development is a critical contributor to an effective mission assurance strategy, although standards are often developed and adopted reactively. Technology and standards planning is a key Enterprise Process Management activity, as identified by the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge, and technology and standards roadmaps are strategic tools used to enable that process. Technology roadmapping has proven effective in guiding enterprise architecture and concept design, and standards planning supports enterprise requirements definition and management. However, there are limited methodologies to guide such standards planning activities. The application of technology roadmapping principles to standards planning formalizes the process and establishes a repeatable framework for standards development and integration. The framework development described in this paper fills a methodological gap by adapting proven roadmapping techniques to standards planning. Through a comparison of roadmapping methodologies and a case study analysis, this approach outlines a systematic process for anticipating and planning standards needs. In the case of developing a standards integration roadmap for NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA), technology roadmapping principles were adapted to develop a roadmap framework to allow NASA and OSMA to define an agency-wide standards integration plan for commercial and industry safety and mission assurance standards. The outcome highlights key adaptations required for roadmapping in a standards context and describes the process steps to formalize a standards planning activity. The roadmapping framework adapted for standards development and integration enables more strategic, forward-looking standards planning and allows for better alignment between evolving capabilities and mission assurance requirements. Beyond its application to mission assurance, this methodology can be transferred to other domains requiring standards development, providing a systematic approach that integrates systems engineering principles into policy strategy and decision-making processes.
Enterprise Systems Engineering↗
Marshall Application Realignment System (MARS) Architecture
The Marshall Application Realignment System (MARS) Architecture project was established to meet the certification requirements of the Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) V2.0 Federal Enterprise Architecture Certification (FEAC) Institute program and to provide added value to the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Application Portfolio Management process. The MARS Architecture aims to: (1) address the NASA MSFC Chief Information Officer (CIO) strategic initiative to improve Application Portfolio Management (APM) by optimizing investments and improving portfolio performance, and (2) develop a decision-aiding capability by which applications registered within the MSFC application portfolio can be analyzed and considered for retirement or decommission. The MARS Architecture describes a to-be target capability that supports application portfolio analysis against scoring measures (based on value) and overall portfolio performance objectives (based on enterprise needs and policies). This scoring and decision-aiding capability supports the process by which MSFC application investments are realigned or retired from the application portfolio. The MARS Architecture is a multi-phase effort to: (1) conduct strategic architecture planning and knowledge development based on the DoDAF V2.0 six-step methodology, (2) describe one architecture through multiple viewpoints, (3) conduct portfolio analyses based on a defined operational concept, and (4) enable a new capability to support the MSFC enterprise IT management mission, vision, and goals. This report documents Phase 1 (Strategy and Design), which includes discovery, planning, and development of initial architecture viewpoints. Phase 2 will move forward the process of building the architecture, widening the scope to include application realignment (in addition to application retirement), and validating the underlying architecture logic before moving into Phase 3. The MARS Architecture key stakeholders are most interested in Phase 3 because this is where the data analysis, scoring, and recommendation capability is realized. Stakeholders want to see the benefits derived from reducing the steady-state application base and identify opportunities for portfolio performance improvement and application realignment.
Belshe, Andrea↗
Making Sense of Rocket Science - Building NASA's Knowledge Management Program
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has launched a range of KM activities-from deploying intelligent "know-bots" across millions of electronic sources to ensuring tacit knowledge is transferred across generations. The strategy and implementation focuses on managing NASA's wealth of explicit knowledge, enabling remote collaboration for international teams, and enhancing capture of the key knowledge of the workforce. An in-depth view of the work being done at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) shows the integration of academic studies and practical applications to architect, develop, and deploy KM systems in the areas of document management, electronic archives, information lifecycles, authoring environments, enterprise information portals, search engines, experts directories, collaborative tools, and in-process decision capture. These systems, together, comprise JPL's architecture to capture, organize, store, and distribute key learnings for the U.S. exploration of space.
knowledge management organizational learning NASA ↗
Marshall Space Flight Center Propulsion Systems Department (PSD) KM Initiative
NASA Marshall Space Flight Center s Propulsion Systems Department (PSD) is four months into a fifteen month Knowledge Management (KM) initiative to support enhanced engineering decision making and analyses, faster resolution of anomalies (near-term) and effective, efficient knowledge infused engineering processes, reduced knowledge attrition, and reduced anomaly occurrences (long-term). The near-term objective of this initiative is developing a KM Pilot project, within the context of a 3-5 year KM strategy, to introduce and evaluate the use of KM within PSD. An internal NASA/MSFC PSD KM team was established early in project formulation to maintain a practitioner, user-centric focus throughout the conceptual development, planning and deployment of KM technologies and capabilities with in the PSD. The PSD internal team is supported by the University of Alabama's Aging Infrastructure Systems Center Of Excellence (AISCE), Intergraph Corporation, and The Knowledge Institute. The principle product of the initial four month effort has been strategic planning of PSD KM implementation by first determining the "as is" state of KM capabilities and developing, planning and documenting the roadmap to achieve the desired "to be" state. Activities undertaken to support the planning phase have included data gathering; cultural surveys, group work-sessions, interviews, documentation review, and independent research. Assessments and analyses have been performed including industry benchmarking, related local and Agency initiatives, specific tools and techniques used and strategies for leveraging existing resources, people and technology to achieve common KM goals. Key findings captured in the PSD KM Strategic Plan include the system vision, purpose, stakeholders, prioritized strategic objectives mapped to the top ten practitioner needs and analysis of current resource usage. Opportunities identified from research, analyses, cultural/KM surveys and practitioner interviews include: executive and senior management sponsorship, KM awareness, promotion and training, cultural change management, process improvement, leveraging existing resources and new innovative technologies to align with other NASA KM initiatives (convergence: the big picture). To enable results based incremental implementation and future growth of the KM initiative, key performance measures have been identified including stakeholder value, system utility, learning and growth (knowledge capture, sharing, reduced anomaly recurrence), cultural change, process improvement and return-on-investment. The next steps for the initial implementation spiral (focused on SSME Turbomachinery) have been identified, largely based on the organization and compilation of summary level engineering process models, data capture matrices, functional models and conceptual-level systems architecture. Key elements include detailed KM requirements definition, KM technology architecture assessment, evaluation and selection, deployable KM Pilot design, development, implementation and evaluation, and justifying full implementation (estimated Return-on-Investment). Features identified for the notional system architecture include the knowledge presentation layer (and its components), knowledge network layer (and its components), knowledge storage layer (and its components), User Interface and capabilities. This paper provides a snapshot of the progress to date, the near term planning for deploying the KM pilot project and a forward look at results based growth of KM capabilities with-in the MSFC PSD.
Caraccioli, Paul↗
Marshall Space Flight Center Propulsion Systems Department (PSD) Knowledge Management (KM) Initiative
NASA Marshall Space Flight Center's Propulsion Systems Department (PSD) is four months into a fifteen month Knowledge Management (KM) initiative to support enhanced engineering decision making and analyses, faster resolution of anomalies (near-term) and effective, efficient knowledge infused engineering processes, reduced knowledge attrition, and reduced anomaly occurrences (long-term). The near-term objective of this initiative is developing a KM Pilot project, within the context of a 3-5 year KM strategy, to introduce and evaluate the use of KM within PSD. An internal NASA/MSFC PSD KM team was established early in project formulation to maintain a practitioner, user-centric focus throughout the conceptual development, planning and deployment of KM technologies and capabilities within the PSD. The PSD internal team is supported by the University of Alabama's Aging Infrastructure Systems Center of Excellence (AISCE), lntergraph Corporation, and The Knowledge Institute. The principle product of the initial four month effort has been strategic planning of PSD KNI implementation by first determining the "as is" state of KM capabilities and developing, planning and documenting the roadmap to achieve the desired "to be" state. Activities undertaken to suppo~th e planning phase have included data gathering; cultural surveys, group work-sessions, interviews, documentation review, and independent research. Assessments and analyses have beon pedormed including industry benchmarking, related local and Agency initiatives, specific tools and techniques used and strategies for leveraging existing resources, people and technology to achieve common KM goals. Key findings captured in the PSD KM Strategic Plan include the system vision, purpose, stakeholders, prioritized strategic objectives mapped to the top ten practitioner needs and analysis of current resource usage. Opportunities identified from research, analyses, cultural1KM surveys and practitioner interviews include: executive and senior management sponsorship, KM awareness, promotion and training, cultural change management, process improvement, leveraging existing resources and new innovative technologies to align with other NASA KM initiatives (convergence: the big picture). To enable results based incremental implementation and future growth of the KM initiative, key performance measures have been identified including stakeholder value, system utility, learning and growth (knowledge capture, sharing, reduced anomaly recurrence), cultural change, process improvement and return-on-investment. The next steps for the initial implementation spiral (focused on SSME Turbomachinery) have been identified, largely based on the organization and compilation of summary level engineering process models, data capture matrices, functional models and conceptual-level svstems architecture. Key elements include detailed KM requirements definition, KM technology architecture assessment, - evaluation and selection, deployable KM Pilot design, development, implementation and evaluation, and justifying full implementation (estimated Return-on-Investment). Features identified for the notional system architecture include the knowledge presentation layer (and its components), knowledge network layer (and its components), knowledge storage layer (and its components), User Interface and capabilities. This paper provides a snapshot of the progress to date, the near term planning for deploying the KM pilot project and a forward look at results based growth of KM capabilities with-in the MSFC PSD.
Caraccioli, Paul↗
Enhancing Cloud Cybersecurity: Prescriptive Controls for Operational Technology
This whitepaper provides strategic insights and recommendations into security cloud-based solutions for electric utilities, encompassing operational technology (OT), virtual power plants (VPP), distributed energy resources (DERs), applications, networks, and data storage as they transition to and leverage cloud infrastructure through managed service providers (MSPs) and cloud service providers (CSPs). Principles derived from established frameworks serve as a foundation for best practices across cybersecurity projects and remove the constraints of settling on a single framework. For organizations that prefer not to integrate a specific framework altogether, elements of the proposed approach could be adopted or tailored to best fit defined requirements and expected functionalities. The Cirrus assessment, a utility cloud feasibility tool, and the roadmap it provides serve as a precursor to this paper, which seeks to be a valuable resource for defining next steps following cloud technology integration feasibility appraisal. With its comprehensive approach to adoption, the Cirrus framework offers strategic guidance on responsibly preparing for or deploying a utility cloud solution. The previously published whitepaper, “Use Case-Informed Framework for Utility Cloud Migration,” details the guiding strategy, research, and deployment of cloud solutions within electric and interconnected grid systems. Before implementing the controls suggested in this document, it is recommended that stakeholders complete Cirrus's cloud integration assessment and pair the results with their unique cybersecurity controls to form a comprehensive cloud-based utility cybersecurity plan. The Cirrus outcome will consider a series of future architectures for the grid before and after the energy transition and evaluate the arguments for and against cloud applications for each electric and interconnected grid layer. This document is a companion to the original whitepaper, "Use Case-Informed Framework for Utility Cloud Migration" to further identify and recommend security controls based on Cirrus’s cloud integration assessment output. The following whitepaper outlines the cybersecurity controls that secure cloud-service models pertinent to the electric sector using the predefined categories identify, protect, detect, and respond and recover. The objective is to outline prescriptive security controls based on the type of architecture and data stored in the cloud. The focus includes dissecting the shared responsibility model and elucidating what on-premises Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Software as a Service (SaaS) entail. A pivotal consideration in this context is allocating responsibility for foundational cybersecurity aspects—having used Cirrus for the cloud integration assessment. The ensuing controls detailed herein also represent a checklist of controls necessary for a secure cloud transition, equipping utilities with the knowledge to navigate this digital transformation with confidence and strategic foresight in a safe and responsible manner.
42 ENGINEERING↗
Application of Cyber-Informed Engineering for Protecting BESS
This white paper synthesizes an array of crucial grid services provided by BESS technology, assesses its architecture and communications, and presents a case study for analysis against the principles introduced by Cyber-Informed Engineering (CIE). Furthermore, in walking through the analysis, this paper presents a framework to evaluate risks and solutions when considering BESS components. Asset owners and buyers could perform this analysis to assess their BESS product implementations, alternative inverter-based resources (IBR), and energy management systems (EMS). Battery systems fulfill various roles contingent on the unique market demands and the specific challenges presented by regional grid infrastructures. These roles also vary due to the differing utility models for ownership and operation, which are adapted to meet regional and local capabilities and requirements. Concerns have been raised regarding the potential for adversaries to exploit knowledge of battery operational patterns to orchestrate decisive attacks. However, the security of operational data for these systems may not be the primary vulnerability, as much of this information is already well-understood within the community. Applying a modest degree of subject matter expertise can often yield valuable predictions regarding how a battery will respond under certain conditions, such as grid emergencies, high or low-temperature days, Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) events, and outages. The operational characteristics of batteries are well-documented, and their capabilities, including the risks associated with misoperation and the resulting consequences, are published and understood within the industry. CIE practices represent the next step in gaining functional assurance and providing an acceptable level of risk, regardless of whether a battery vendor can support a trusted and validated supply chain. While this issue has exacerbated supply chain challenges, it is not an isolated condition. This foreign supply route is the primary source of BESS for the U.S. market. Significant efforts are underway through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) to change that. Still, strategic short-term operational mitigations are needed to ensure the security of our operational technology (OT) systems, which are enhanced by instilling trust and are separate from vendors implementing CIE principles.
25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
Program Options to Explore Ocean Worlds
Including Earth, roughly a dozen water ocean worlds exist in the solar system: the relict worlds Ceres and Mars, vast oceans inside most of the large Jovian and Saturnian icy moons, and Kuiper Belt Objects like Triton, Charon, and Pluto whose geologies are dominated by water and ammonia. Key pieces of the ocean-world science puzzle – which when completed may reveal whether life is widespread in the cosmos, why it exists where it does, and how it originates – are distributed among them. The eventual exploration of all these worlds will yield humanity’s total tangible knowledge about life in the universe, essentially forever. Thus, their exploration has existential significance for humanity’s self-regard, and indeed perhaps of our place in the natural scheme. The matter of planning how to pursue such a difficult and unprecedented exploration opportunity is therefore historic. The technical challenges are formidable, far harder than at Mars: missions to the Jovian and Saturnian ocean worlds are severely power-limited; trip times can be as much as a half decade and decade, respectively. And the science targets are global-scale oceans beneath kilometers of cryogenic ice. Reaching and exploring them would be a multi-generational undertaking, so again it is essential to plan and prepare. Today, we lack the instrumentation, subsystems, and remote operational-intelligence technologies needed to build and use exploration avatars as good as what we can envision needing. Each ocean world holds a piece of the puzzle, but the three priority targets are Europa at Jupiter, and Enceladus and Titan at Saturn. As with the systematic exploration of Mars, exploring these diverse worlds poses a complex technical and programmatic challenge – a strategic challenge – that needs to be designed and managed if each generation is to see its work bear fruit, and if the space science community is to make most effective use of the public money devoted to the quest. Strategic programs benefit from coherence. In only 15 years, the Mars Exploration Program (MEP) has transformed humanity’s view of Mars as a once and future habitable place, a world quite possibly holding relict evidence of life. Finding such evidence, we would study it to know if that life shared an origin common with Earth life. However, life in the ocean worlds could not have shared our origin, so exploring them opens another level in our quest to understand life in the universe: not only to places with vast salt-water seas known to contain organics and hydrothermal seafloors active today, but to places where anything alive cannot be related to us. MEP’s success – from its presence in the public consciousness to its rewriting of planetary habitability – make it an obvious template and source of lessons learned for a viable ocean worlds exploration program (OWEP). Six attributes of the MEP are analyzed for application to a potential OWEP. From this, five hypothetical programmatic scenarios are compared to the default case, and conclusions drawn. A coherent OWEP should have several parts: first, dedicated continuous investment in enabling technologies; and second, two directed-purpose, medium-class (~$1B) missions per decade that conduct pivotal investigations on a documented roadmap. Science could start in 2035, informing development of decadal flagship missions after Europa Clipper, to the places revealed to hold the most promise. The fastest pace of scientific discoveries would require access to high-performance propulsion infrastructure, e.g., the Space Launch System, Falcon Heavy, and high-power in-space solar electric propulsion, all capable of halving trip time. Not including these boosts, such a program would cost about a half-billion dollars more per year than NASA’s existing mission portfolio; the program architecture funded today cannot deliver a strategic OWEP while also sustaining balance among other solar system exploration priorities and opportunities.
Naderi, F.↗