With $467 million in total budget and 144 months in duration, Planet Orbit is an ambitious program. Its objective is to build a spacecraft with a photometer for identifying terrestrial planets in the universe. Scientists believe that this program will eventually help them understand the extent of life on other planets and across much of the universe. "It represents a breakthrough in science that has the potential to change mankind's views about his position and place in the universe," according to Eric Anderson, Planet Orbit program manager.

Next week the PDR (preliminary design review) will be held. The review committee is expected to be tough, and Anderson knows from experience that the program has to be in excellent shape to be granted approval to move from definition to the design phase. He believes the program is progressing well technically, but he is aware of some interpersonal and human relations issues that may be of concern to the stakeholders. Additionally, Anderson is concerned that the latest schedule has some serious disconnects with senior management's delivery expectations. However, he feels that the PCT can push the team hard enough to make up any schedule shortfalls that they may encounter during the development phase.

Anderson is excited to have the Planet Orbit program finally ready to advance to the next phase of development. It has been three years since the program was initially approved. He still feels that the objective of the program fits well with the mission of the space agency—exploring life in the universe.

Anderson has been through the status of the program several times already in preparation for the PDR meeting with the committee. However, he believes it may be useful to recap with some of his key team members one more time to ensure all issues and concerns have been properly addressed. He reviewed his status documentation before Charles Wright's arrival to his office. Wright is the project manager of the local site for the Planet Orbit Program. When Wright arrived, they reviewed the program again in comprehensive detail.

The Planet Orbit program is a special space mission program sponsored by the space agency. The assigned program manager, Anderson, is a senior scientist with the agency. He had initiated the idea for the Planet Orbit program and had proposed it to the Space Agency multiple times since 1992. "Our idea is to use a transit photometer that will help increase the understanding of life in the universe and other planets like Earth," Anderson described. In several instances in the past, the program cost estimates and proposed scientific methodology were compared to much larger and more complicated missions. As a result, with each selection cycle, the program was forced to respond to new demands and requests. In particular, the program had to redo its costing several times to validate its accuracy and had to prove the viability of its chosen data collection technique with ground-based demonstrations. Additionally, they had to demonstrate that the research center had the capability for the end-to-end management of the program. It was not until December 2001, after persistent attempts to prove the idea for almost a decade, that the program was eventually selected.

Because the breadth, depth, and complexity of the program are so large, the agency determined that all of the program components (program management, ground segment management, and flight segment management) were too much a single program manager to manage individually. Therefore, in June 2002, the space agency selected the spacecraft laboratory as the mission management partner in an attempt to reduce risk. Additionally, the Technology Corporation was selected as the industrial partner of the program for development of the hardware. Under this arrangement, the research center was still responsible for roughly 70 percent of the direct cost from instrument development and delivery and science management.

The structure of Planet Orbit is a program form of organizational structure involving multiple subteams in three organizations (Figure C.1). The structure is atypical because the program is shared by two centers research center and spacecraft laboratory. The program has a PMO, which is an entity created for a specific period of time that is dedicated specifically to the Planet Orbit program. The PMO provides a variety of managerial and administrative support that is pertinent to managing a major and complex program such as Planet Orbit.

Team members were selected by the PCT, which represented the functional project managers reporting to Anderson. The criteria for selection of the team members included experience, competency, dedication, and enthusiasm. External hiring for the program included employees from the spacecraft laboratory and the Technology Corporation who were also picked by the Planet Orbit team.

The Planet Orbit team size varied across program phases as the demand for personnel fluctuated. At the end of the definition phase, the team at the research center was composed of 25 full-time employees; the team at spacecraft laboratory totaled 12 full-time employees and 5 part-time members; the Technology Corporation's team included 80 full-time employees. Because the program is geographically dispersed across three different organizations, communication among the members is critical. The major means of communication include phone (frequent), e-mail (frequent), face-to-face meetings (frequent), and teleconference (weekly). There are also the casual and informal communication channels, including periodic social gatherings, picnics, and barbeques.

A formal team building exercise (referred to as four-dimensional (4-D) training) was held somewhat late after the start of the program. The 4-D training, provided by an external organization, helped the team members get to know one another, form cohesiveness within the team, and create "smoothness and harmony" across the organizations involved. This became a vehicle for cross-organizational and, cross-site team building and integration of the research center, spacecraft laboratory, and Technology Corporation personnel. However, this was not as effective as originally planned. Many team members felt that 4-D training, although a good initiative, came too late to significantly benefit the team.

Figure C.1. Program organizational structure.

As program manager, Anderson is responsible for the execution of the entire mission and the scientific integrity of the investigation. The responsibility for day-to-day management of the program is delegated by the program manager to the project team at the spacecraft laboratory, where the project manager resides. The Planet Orbit's Educational and Public Outreach (EPO) Organization, the Investigator Working Group (IWG) and the Science Working Group (SWG), all report directly to the program manager. In general, the research center and its program manager are responsible for the development and test of the photometer and the overall ground segment. The spacecraft laboratory and its project manager, Wright, are responsible for providing the flight system, which includes the spacecraft, flight segment assembly/test/launch operations (ATLO), and flight segment checkout. Technology Corporation is a subcontractor to the spacecraft laboratory, and is responsible for developing, building, integrating, and testing the flight system and mission operations center, in addition to launching the flight segment.

For the Planet Orbit program, top management of the agency is involved during the gate approvals and program reviews. Three formal review teams are established to evaluate the program. These include the program formal review (PFR) team—the standing review board picked from various key organizations; the independent assessment team (IAT)—selected from the agency; and the systems management office assessment (SMOA) team—selected from the spacecraft laboratory. The PFR has 21 members, the IAT has 6–9 members, and SMOA has 2–4 members.

Review teams are used as the mechanism to evaluate whether the program is in line with the agency mission. Generally, the review teams make recommendations (so-called "findings") and evaluate the readiness of the program to proceed to the next phase. Reviews help the program manager and team manage the program and stay in line with senior management's expectations and the formal objectives for the program. The team must address any significant plan deviations and inform the review panels to ensure that they agree the team has properly addressed and resolved their concerns. This mechanism is used during all gate reviews.

The program objectives must align directly with the mission and strategy documented by the space agency. The objective of the Planet Orbit Program is to build a spacecraft with a photometer for space exploration. Its scientific goal is to conduct a census of extraterrestrial solar planets by using a photometer in a heliocentric orbit. The first priority or strategic focus of the program is science goals, followed by the clear mandate to stay within a number of constraints (schedule, cost, and technical integrity). The science focus is clearly associated with agency value and is reinforced by the program manager to the core team and other team members throughout the program.

The Planet Orbit program is built around the following three major deliverables: The research center is responsible for developing and testing the photometer and the overall ground segment. The work done in the laboratory includes the development of the flight system (spacecraft, flight segment, and ATLO) and flight segment on-orbit checkout system. The Technology Corporation is responsible for developing, building, integrating, and testing the flight system. The major customer who will benefit from the program is the space agency, the parent organization of the research center and the spacecraft laboratory.

The Planet Orbit program has six major PLC phases. The first phase is advance studies (prephase A). The objective of this phase is to produce a broad spectrum of ideas and alternatives for missions from which new programs can be selected. Second, is the preliminary analysis (phase A). In this phase, the team has to determine the feasibility and desirability of a suggested new major system and its compatibility with the agency's strategic plans. Third is the definition phase (phase B), which has an objective to define the program in sufficient detail to establish an initial baseline that is capable of meeting mission needs. Next is the design phase (phase C). In this phase, the team completes the detailed design of the system. Then, the program goes to the development phase (phase D) to build the subsystems and integrate them to create the system, while developing confidence that it will be able to meet the system requirements, deploy the system, and ensure that it is ready for operations. The last phase in the life cycle is operation (phase E). In this phase, the team has to make sure that the system actually meets the initial need and then dispose of the system in a responsible manner. Figure C.2 summarizes the PLC and the major milestones, including the timeline.

Major milestones include mission concept review (MCR), mission definition review (MDR), system definition review (SDR), preliminary design review (PDR), critical design review (CDR), system acceptance review (SAR), flight readiness review (FRR), operational readiness review (ORR), and decommissioning review (DR). These phases and milestones are consistent and standard to the agency. There is definition and understanding of the decisions that need to be made at each milestone review. Planet Orbit is currently scheduled to pass the PDR stage. The first review team is the PFR, which is a standing review board. Their job is to verify or recommend that the program move forward on the basis of the completeness of its requirements and the understanding of the agency's requirements. The second review team is the IAT, whose job is to make the recommendation of whether the program should be confirmed. Next, the SMOA team evaluates the aspects of the program, based on the interest of the chief engineering office. After the program achieves PDR approval, it must meet a major constraint set by the agency that the program must then launch within 36 months, including one month of commissioning. This means that phases C and D cannot exceed more than 36 months, collectively.

Figure C.2. PLC and major milestones.

The tactical management of the Planet Orbit program includes a formal WBS, roughly seven levels, in which specific team leaders are responsible for certain levels. Wright primarily has control over level 1 (program level), 2 (segment level), 3 (system level), and 4 (subsystem level); whereas, the project managers in the photometer, flight segments, and functional teams have been responsible for the lower levels (assembly, subassembly, and parts). Each level contains numerous activities. The spacecraft, as an example, has approximately 4000 activities. The WBS was used as the baseline to develop the program schedule and cost.

The schedule was structured to conform to the following boundary conditions: The funding profile for fiscal year 2005 through fiscal year 2007; the start of phase C and phase D to be after the preliminary design review and confirmation review; and phase C and phase D must have a duration of 36 months or less. The cost-estimation process involved triangulation of various methods such as a bottom-up, top-down process, independent cost modeling, and comparison with other similar programs (analogous estimating).

While a mitigation plan is developed for risks, the team has a mechanism with the mission assurance organization that tracks issues and problems separately. The agency has set a formal standard on risk mitigation (risk management policy document) in which the risks are rated based on their probability of occurrence and severity. Red, green, and blue charts are used to capture the varying degree of risks, which is discussed in the quarterly and monthly management reviews. Risks generically are owned by the program, and they are assigned to a responsible individual who resolves and reports up the management chain. Planet Orbit is a fairly low-risk mission because it has a high-technology readiness level and does not involve on-board human life.

The program is tightly monitored and controlled. All technical performance, cost, or schedule parameters that require approval by the agency administrator, the associate administrator, the lead center director, or program manager are identified in Table C.1. These controlled parameters are well documented and shared with all team members in progress meetings and reports.

Several project management applications are used in the program. A critical path schedule and Gantt chart are used for scheduling and are based on the WBS. The number of activities in the schedule is in the thousands and disaggregated through the system of hierarchical scheduling, based on WBS system levels. Standard enterprise-management tools are used for budget and expense tracking. The team is required to do an earned-value analysis starting with phase C for the Technology Corporation's contract. Off-the-shelf commercial products, such as Live-Link, Project, and Doors are used to collaborate among the three major organizations. However, all team members have not used them universally.

Program performance is measured and tracked very carefully. In particular, aggregate actual-to-plan metrics for the master schedule and total budget are required by the agency.

Anderson and Wright completed their review of the program documentation and concluded that the program was proceeding well. There were a couple of issues that they discussed, which had been the source of team frustration in the past.

The first concern was that cross-site coordination was not going as well as expected, creating several time delays and inefficiencies. Early cross-organizational training turned out to be relatively ineffective. Implementation of some selected software tools, such as Live-Link, helped the situation considerably, but they decided that more effective management by the program manager and core team leaders was essential.

The second key issue related to the schedule constraints imposed by the agency. For the most part, the completion within 36 months was, in essence, dictated by senior management. The program team accepted this date without the appropriate analysis and consolidation of schedule to support it. Additional schedule analysis, since the last milestone review, indicated that the target completion date may not be achievable and will need to be appropriately discussed at the upcoming PDR meeting.

As they concluded, Anderson and Wright recapped where they thought they stood with the program overall. Anderson summarized as follows:

He concluded, "I think we are very well prepared for the upcoming committee review. I'll review what we discussed today with the other core team members, and I think we are ready to proceed."

The planet orbit example demonstrates how the program management model can scale as a viable management approach for small, multi-discipline development efforts to very large and complex efforts involving multiple organizations. However, as program size and complexity grow, the capabilities and experience of the program manager becomes more important. Fundamentally, this program is sound, however, it is evident that cross-project and cross-organization collaboration and synergy is breaking down. This shows the importance of leadership and other "soft skills" on the part of program managers.