Knowledge management at NASA
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
knowledge management information technology organi↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “knowledge management information technology organizational learning NASA”
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.
Knowledge sharing at NASA
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
knowledge management information technology organi↗
Sharing NASA's knowledge with the world
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
knowledge management information technology organi↗
Draft position paper on knowledge management in space activities
As other fields of industry, space activities are facing the challenge of Knowledge Management and the International Academy of Astronautics decided to settle in 2002 a Study Group to analyse the problem and issue general guidelines. This communication presents the draft position paper of this group in view to be discussed during the 2003 IAF Congress.
NASA↗
Sharing knowledge with the public during a crisis: NASA's public portal
This case study looks at integrating the web governance policies and procedures, migration to a single content management solution, and integrating best-of-breed technology with high-impact, interactive components. In particular, this case study is interesting in the dynamic scalability of this application to meet the needs of an organization on the front lines during a crisis.
organizational learning↗
Creating an architecture to deploy knowledge management at your organization
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
knowledge management information technology organi↗
From the Knowledge-based Digital Platform (KbDP) Concept for Advanced Air Mobility Research to a Preliminary Prototype
Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) encompasses a range of innovative operational and technological changes to aviation (electric aircraft, increasingly automated aircraft, increasingly automated airspace operations, etc.) that are transforming aviation’s role in everyday movement of people and goods. There are multiple associated concepts and use cases for AAM, all interrelated, including small Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM), Upper-Class E Traffic Management (ETM), Extensible Traffic Management (xTM), Regional Air Mobility (RAM), and Urban Air Mobility (UAM). These AAM operations must integrate with traditional Air Traffic Management (ATM) operations, as well as non-aviation modes of transportation and logistics. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is spearheading an innovative digital engineering approach to integrate, communicate, and facilitate the research of multi-modal transportation systems. The Knowledge-based Digital Platform (KbDP) is a concept being developed that ties the workflows of Project Managers (PM), Principal Investigators (PI), and System Engineers together across organizational boundaries. It does so through the management of an information database defined by mathematical, data science, and system engineering principles. Machine Learning (ML) algorithms play a key role in this concept by extracting meaningful knowledge from the information database, which the human user leverages to greatly improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their research. Expected benefits of this concept include improved technology transfers from research to production, improved research portfolio investments, and research outcomes that are more integrated with all aspects of the multi-modal transportation problem. The preliminary KbDP prototype has been realized using UAM as a pathfinder use case and developed by a team of system engineer, software developer, data scientist, and interns.
Systems Engineering↗
The Knowledge-based Digital Platform Concept for Advanced Air Mobility Research and Development
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Langley Research Center (LaRC) is spearheading an innovative digital engineering approach to integrate, communicate, and facilitate the research of multi-modal transportation systems. The Knowledge-based Digital Platform (KbDP) is a concept being developed that ties the workflows of Project Managers (PM), Principal Investigators (PI), and System Engineers (SE) together across organizational boundaries. The overarching vision for the KbDP Concept for AAM R&D is a substantial undertaking. The initial concept and implementation will focus on UAM operations to tractably learn and adjust the concept with a manageable database. Lessons learned and best practices with a smaller scope will enable successful scalability to AAM R&D or even to the entire modes of transportation and logistics. The UAM vision is one in which advanced technologies and new operational procedures enable practical and cost-effective air transport as an integrated mode of movement of people and goods throughout metropolitan areas. Initial implementation of three KbDP concepts of use shows promising benefits to NASA’s Air Traffic Management-Exploration (ATM-X) UAM Airspace Subproject. It is envisioned that the KbDP will manage an information database defined by mathematical, data science, and system engineering principles. AIML algorithms play a vital role in this KbDP concept by extracting meaningful knowledge from the information database, which the human user leverages to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their research greatly.
ATM↗
A Three-fold Outlook of the Ultra-Efficient Engine Technology Program Office (UEET)
The Ultra-Efficient Engine Technology (UEET) Office at NASA Glenn Research Center is a part of the Aeronautics Directorate. Its vision is to develop and hand off revolutionary turbine engine propulsion technologies that will enable future generation vehicles over a wide range of flight speeds. There are seven different technology area projects of UEET. During my tenure at NASA Glenn Research Center, my assignment was to assist three different areas of UEET, simultaneously. I worked with Kathy Zona in Education Outreach, Lynn Boukalik in Knowledge Management, and Denise Busch with Financial Management. All of my tasks were related to the business side of UEET. As an intern with Education Outreach I created a word search to partner with an exhibit of a Turbine Engine developed out of the UEET office. This exhibit is a portable model that is presented to students of varying ages. The word search complies with National Standards for Education which are part of every science, engineering, and technology teachers curriculum. I also updated a Conference Planning/Workshop Excel Spreadsheet for the UEET Office. I collected and inputted facility overviews from various venues, both on and off site to determine where to hold upcoming conferences. I then documented which facilities were compliant with the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Hotel and Motel Fire Safety Act of 1990. The second area in which I worked was Knowledge Management. a large knowledge management system online which has extensive documentation that continually needs reviewing, updating, and archiving. Knowledge management is the ability to bring individual or team knowledge to an organizational level so that the information can be stored, shared, reviewed, archived. Livelink and a secure server are the Knowledge Management systems that UEET utilizes, Through these systems, I was able to obtain the documents needed for archiving. My assignment was to obtain intellectual property including reports, presentations, or any other documents related to the project. My next task was to document the author, date of creation, and all other properties of each document. To archive these documents I worked extensively with Microsoft Excel. different financial systems of accounting such as the SAP business accounting system. I also learned the best ways to present financial data and shadowed my mentor as she presented financial data to both UEET's project management and the Resources Analysis and Management Office (RAMO). I analyzed the June 2004 financial data of UEET and used Microsoft Excel to input the results of the data. This process made it easier to present the full cost of the project in the month of June. In addition I assisted in the End of the Year 2003 Reconciliation of Purchases of UEET.
Graham, La Quilia E.↗
NASA Software Engineering Benchmarking Study
To identify best practices for the improvement of software engineering on projects, NASA's Offices of Chief Engineer (OCE) and Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) formed a team led by Heather Rarick and Sally Godfrey to conduct this benchmarking study. The primary goals of the study are to identify best practices that: Improve the management and technical development of software intensive systems; Have a track record of successful deployment by aerospace industries, universities [including research and development (R&D) laboratories], and defense services, as well as NASA's own component Centers; and Identify candidate solutions for NASA's software issues. Beginning in the late fall of 2010, focus topics were chosen and interview questions were developed, based on the NASA top software challenges. Between February 2011 and November 2011, the Benchmark Team interviewed a total of 18 organizations, consisting of five NASA Centers, five industry organizations, four defense services organizations, and four university or university R and D laboratory organizations. A software assurance representative also participated in each of the interviews to focus on assurance and software safety best practices. Interviewees provided a wealth of information on each topic area that included: software policy, software acquisition, software assurance, testing, training, maintaining rigor in small projects, metrics, and use of the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) framework, as well as a number of special topics that came up in the discussions. NASA's software engineering practices compared favorably with the external organizations in most benchmark areas, but in every topic, there were ways in which NASA could improve its practices. Compared to defense services organizations and some of the industry organizations, one of NASA's notable weaknesses involved communication with contractors regarding its policies and requirements for acquired software. One of NASA's strengths was its software assurance practices, which seemed to rate well in comparison to the other organizational groups and also seemed to include a larger scope of activities. An unexpected benefit of the software benchmarking study was the identification of many opportunities for collaboration in areas including metrics, training, sharing of CMMI experiences and resources such as instructors and CMMI Lead Appraisers, and even sharing of assets such as documented processes. A further unexpected benefit of the study was the feedback on NASA practices that was received from some of the organizations interviewed. From that feedback, other potential areas where NASA could improve were highlighted, such as accuracy of software cost estimation and budgetary practices. The detailed report contains discussion of the practices noted in each of the topic areas, as well as a summary of observations and recommendations from each of the topic areas. The resulting 24 recommendations from the topic areas were then consolidated to eliminate duplication and culled into a set of 14 suggested actionable recommendations. This final set of actionable recommendations, listed below, are items that can be implemented to improve NASA's software engineering practices and to help address many of the items that were listed in the NASA top software engineering issues. 1. Develop and implement standard contract language for software procurements. 2. Advance accurate and trusted software cost estimates for both procured and in-house software and improve the capture of actual cost data to facilitate further improvements. 3. Establish a consistent set of objectives and expectations, specifically types of metrics at the Agency level, so key trends and models can be identified and used to continuously improve software processes and each software development effort. 4. Maintain the CMMI Maturity Level requirement for critical NASA projects and use CMMI to measure organizations developing software for NASA. 5.onsolidate, collect and, if needed, develop common processes principles and other assets across the Agency in order to provide more consistency in software development and acquisition practices and to reduce the overall cost of maintaining or increasing current NASA CMMI maturity levels. 6. Provide additional support for small projects that includes: (a) guidance for appropriate tailoring of requirements for small projects, (b) availability of suitable tools, including support tool set-up and training, and (c) training for small project personnel, assurance personnel and technical authorities on the acceptable options for tailoring requirements and performing assurance on small projects. 7. Develop software training classes for the more experienced software engineers using on-line training, videos, or small separate modules of training that can be accommodated as needed throughout a project. 8. Create guidelines to structure non-classroom training opportunities such as mentoring, peer reviews, lessons learned sessions, and on-the-job training. 9. Develop a set of predictive software defect data and a process for assessing software testing metric data against it. 10. Assess Agency-wide licenses for commonly used software tools. 11. Fill the knowledge gap in common software engineering practices for new hires and co-ops.12. Work through the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) program with universities in strengthening education in the use of common software engineering practices and standards. 13. Follow up this benchmark study with a deeper look into what both internal and external organizations perceive as the scope of software assurance, the value they expect to obtain from it, and the shortcomings they experience in the current practice. 14. Continue interactions with external software engineering environment through collaborations, knowledge sharing, and benchmarking.
Rarick, Heather L.↗