Concepts, requirements, and design approaches for building successful planning and scheduling systems

Traditional practice of systems engineering management assumes requirements can be precisely determined and unambiguously defined prior to system design and implementation; practice further assumes requirements are held static during implementation. Human-computer decision support systems for service planning and scheduling applications do not conform well to these assumptions. Adaptation to the traditional practice of systems engineering management are required. Basic technology exists to support these adaptations. Additional innovations must be encouraged and nutured. Continued partnership between the programmatic and technical perspective assures proper balance of the impossible with the possible. Past problems have the following origins: not recognizing the unusual and perverse nature of the requirements for planning and scheduling; not recognizing the best starting point assumptions for the design; not understanding the type of system that being built; and not understanding the design consequences of the operations concept selected

Re-engineering NASA's space communications to remain viable in a constrained fiscal environment

Along with the Red and Blue Teams commissioned by the NASA Administrator in 1992, NASA's Associate Administrator for Space Communications commissioned a Blue Team to review the Office of Space Communications (Code O) Core Program and determine how the program could be conducted faster, better, and cheaper. Since there was no corresponding Red Team for the Code O Blue Team, the Blue Team assumed a Red Team independent attitude and challenged the status quo, including current work processes, functional distinctions, interfaces, and information flow, as well as traditional management and system development practices. The Blue Team's unconstrained, non-parochial, and imaginative look at NASA's space communications program produced a simplified representation of the space communications infrastructure that transcends organizational and functional boundaries, in addition to existing systems and facilities. Further, the Blue Team adapted the 'faster, better, cheaper' charter to be relevant to the multi-mission, continuous nature of the space communications program and to serve as a gauge for improving customer services concurrent with achieving more efficient operations and infrastructure life cycle economies. This simplified representation, together with the adapted metrics, offers a future view and process model for reengineering NASA's space communications to remain viable in a constrained fiscal environment. Code O remains firm in its commitment to improve productivity, effectiveness, and efficiency. In October 1992, the Associate Administrator reconstituted the Blue Team as the Code O Success Team (COST) to serve as a catalyst for change. In this paper, the COST presents the chronicle and significance of the simplified representation and adapted metrics, and their application during the FY 1993-1994 activities