|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Course Outline
Challenger Disaster Disclaimer National Security Space Programs Mythical Man – Month Resolving Engineer – Mgr Conflicts Analytic & Gaming Sims Complex Systems |
• Primary driver cost, not mission success • Unrealistic budgets, unexecutable programs • Competitor not “burdened” by actual cost • Budgets match unrealistic estimates • Requirements creep • Cost growth 50% – 100% |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
• Success – oriented schedule
• Top – down testing – Ok for design – Not for test • Redefining success – 1/3 burn-through – Order of magnitude estimates |
• Hiding failures
• Ignoring difficult issues • Punishing those who notice problems • Marketing over engineering |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
• Person with clout • Ensure these suggestions are followed • Loyalty is to technical credibility — Not to marketing • “The buck stops here” — Catch mistakes — Catch deliberately misleading work — Ensure no “1 in 100,000” whoppers • Duties vary with program size — To avoid excessive overhead — Most tasks should be done anyway • Office ensures not ignored • Need experienced person • Need sufficiently powerful office |
• Reports/Brfs to Outside Customers — Chief Scientist examines these — Works w developers from start — Ensures meet tech stds • 1: No "whoppers" • 2: Follow good SE practices • 3: Address customer needs • 4: Follow std prog processes • Products to Outside Customers — Chief Scientist examines these — Works w developers from start — Ensures meet tech stds • Does NOT report to Program Mgr |
||||||||||||||||||
TOP |
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
1: No "whoppers" 2: Follow good SE practices |
|||||||||||||||||||
3: Address customer needs |
<--- WHY IS THIS #3, NOT #1? | ||||||||||||||||||
4: Follow std program processes |
• Part of 2nd priority: customer needs
• If you have whoppers — You lose credibility with customer — You lose credibility with the public • Your first priority is YOUR REPUTATION — Think Space Shuttle |
||||||||||||||||||
TOP | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Projects that have had — Schedule slips — Cost overruns — Trouble meeting tech stds Programs likely to have problems — Look across program — Are there trends? — Similar problems? — Similar fixes? |
• Problem projects can receive attention — Project manager can make request — Program Manager can make request — Chief Scientist can make request — Critical mass of project engineers can • Critical mass defined at program start • Critical mass defined for each project • Project leaders can't hide problems | ||||||||||||||||||
TOP | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
How many programs set up, in advance, procedures for dealing with problems? How many programs prefer to hope they’ll never have any? |
|||||||||||||||||||
TOP | |||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
• Need to have Office of Chief Scientist — One person too few on big programs — About 3% of program — 30-person office, one Chief Scientist • Would work multiple projects • 3% of each project's budget — Smaller programs • Project leader • Work especially tough problems • Other projects as budget allows |
• Ph.D. in appropriate field — Aero engineering — Physics — Math • 20+ years experience — Multiple programs — Project leadership • ATF/TF/STF (Technical Ladder) • Management experience — Project management experience — Regular management experience • Not grounds for rejection • No substitute for tech expertise |
||||||||||||||||||
A “tax” of 3% is small enough that it would not wreck contractor rates. But it’s big enough to allow the Chief Scientist to actually do something. |
|||||||||||||||||||
TOP |