Summary of Results from Stakeholder Value Network Analysis for by Sfusaro

VIEWS: 39 PAGES: 59

									     Summary of Results from
Stakeholder Value Network Analysis
for NASA/NOAA Earth Observations Program


     Timothy Sutherland, Edward Crawley

                February 3, 2008



                       1
              Summary of Work
• Earth Science Decadal Survey released
  in Jan. 2007 – major milestone
• MIT partnered with Goddard Space
  Flight Center to develop:
  – Comprehensive stakeholder analysis
  – System architecture software tool for reconfiguring
    mission timelines based on changing constraints
• MIT analyses compliment decadal survey & add
  mathematical rigor to the mission campaign
  design process
   Earth Science                 MIT Stakeholder &
  Decadal Survey             System Architecture Study
Focuses on needs &           Articulates needs & objectives of
objectives of science        all major stakeholders; Considers
community; Considers         scientific, economic,
some societal                social, and policy-related
benefits                     benefits


                             Examines entire trade space to find
Presents one suggested       more optimal mission combinations;
mission timeline, but does   Enables reconfiguration of mission
not examine entire           timelines to respond to changing
trade-space of possible      constraints: budget, cost, technology
missions                     readiness, data continuity concerns,
                             science priorities
    NASA Systems Engineering Processes and
          Requirements NPR 7123.1A
• 3.2.1 Stakeholder Expectations Definition Process
   – Elicit and define use cases, scenarios, operational concepts, and
     stakeholder expectations for the applicable product-line life-cycle
     phases and WBS model.
• 3.2.2 Technical Requirements Definition Process
   – Transform the baselined stakeholder expectations into unique,
     quantitative, and measurable technical requirements expressed as
     "shall" statements that can be used for defining a design solution for
     the WBS model end product and related enabling products.
• 3.2.3 Logical Decomposition Process
   – Improve understanding of the defined technical requirements and the
     relationships among the requirements (e.g., functional, behavioral,
     and temporal) and to transform the defined set of technical
     requirements into a set of logical decomposition models and their
     associated set of derived technical requirements for input to the
     design solution definition process.
                                     4
• 3.2.4 Design Solution Definition Process
   – Translate the outputs of the logical decomposition process into a
     design solution definition that is in a form consistent with the product-
     line life-cycle phase and WBS model location in the system structure
     and that will satisfy phase exit criteria.
• 3.2.5 Product Implementation Process
   – Generate a specified product of a WBS model through buying, making,
     or reusing in a form consistent with the product-line life-cycle phase
     exit criteria and that satisfies the design solution definition specified
     requirements (e.g., drawings, specifications).
• 3.2.6 Product Integration Process
   – Transform the design solution definition into the desired end product
     of the WBS model through assembly and integration of lower level,
     validated end products in a form consistent with the product-line life-
     cycle phase exit criteria and that satisfies the design solution
     definition requirements (e.g., drawings, specifications).


                                      5
•   3.2.7 Product Verification Process
•   3.2.8 Product Validation Process
•   3.2.9 Product Transition Process
•   3.2.1 Technical Planning Process




                                 6
Framework for Analysis




          7
Review of Stakeholder Modeling Technique (1)
 1. Three-level stakeholder map created
        Level 1:              Level 2: (13 stakeholders)




 Level 3 map shows more detail of aggregation/hierarchy
 within some Level 2 stakeholders
Review of Stakeholder Modeling Technique (2)
 2. Objectives, specific needs, & inputs
   articulated for all 13 stakeholders
Review of Stakeholder Modeling Technique (3)
 3. Value network map created – 190 value flows
Simplified Stakeholder Model Value Flows




                   11
Review of Stakeholder Modeling Technique (4)
 4. Numeric scores assigned to each value flow
Review of Stakeholder Modeling Technique (5)
 5. Value flow scores verified using two methods:
 • Interviews with stakeholder representatives
 • Proxy data sources – surveys, research reports,
   government records, etc
 Ex: House Committee hearings used to validate science
   category importance to Government




                  (110th Session of Congress)
Review of Stakeholder Modeling Technique (6)
 Ex. #2: Stakeholder representation in NRC Committees
   for Earth Science reports used to validate importance
   of inputs to S&T Advisory Bodies
Review of Stakeholder Modeling Technique (7)
 6. All possible Value Loops calculated using OPN
   model – 1880 unique, valid loops identified
Review of Stakeholder Modeling Technique (8)
 6. Results derived from Value Loop analysis:
 • Most important stakeholders
 • Most important value flows
 • Most important value loops
 • Highest-value NASA/NOAA outputs
 • Highest-value NASA/NOAA inputs
 • Relative importance of Science categories
    Review of Stakeholder Modeling Technique (9)
Most important stakeholders
       & value flows:

Appearance in value loops,
weighted by value loop score




                               17
Review of Stakeholder Modeling Technique (10)
  Most important value loops, ranked by value loop score




                            18
       Simplified Stakeholder Map
• 3 tiers of stakeholders
• Most important value flows / value loops




                          19
Highest Value-Producing NASA/NOAA Outputs

  Data/resources
   to Scientists
            Info to
         S&T Advisory                                                Science knowledge
                    Collaboration w/              Data to              to Government
                      Int’l Partners            Comm. Users                       Content to
                                     Resources                                    Educators,
                                                          Products for
                                    to Industry                                  Public, Media
                                                             Public




                                         20
     Highest Value-Returning NASA/NOAA Inputs
Funding/Direction
   from Gov.
      Workforce     Science knowledge
                          Launch services
                           from Industry    Science
                                            systems




                                             21
 Comparison Between Needs and Actual Inputs
• Indicates deficiencies in satisfaction of
  NASA/NOAA needs / delivery of value




                         22
Relative Importance of Science Categories
• Importance measured by total amount of
  value produced by each science category




                      23
     Top-Scoring Science Categories
• Top-scoring science categories: Weather,
  Climate, Land-use
• These three categories create similar levels of
  value throughout the stakeholder network
  – Climate: largely science knowledge to
    Government, S&T Advisory, NASA/NOAA
  – Weather & Land-use: largely Earth-observations
    derived products & services to Commercial Data
    Users and Public



                         24
Climate Value Delivery




          25
Weather Value Delivery




          26
Land-Use Value Delivery




           27
   Major Insights from Stakeholder Analysis (1)

• Four 1st Tier stakeholders: NASA/NOAA,
  Scientists, Public, Government
• Corresponds to
  four quadrants
  of the Level 1
  Stakeholder Map




                        28
   Major Insights from Stakeholder Analysis (2)
• Five 2nd Tier stakeholders, each with unique
   contributions to the program:
1. S&T Advisory Bodies – provide science policy advice
2. International Partners – provide space-acquired data
   through cooperation with NAS/NOAA
3. Commercial Data Users – develop innovative products
   & services using Earth observations data
4. Educators – inspire students with science knowledge,
   provide skilled workforce for NASA/NOAA
5. Commercial Industry – provide science systems and
   launch capabilities for NASA/NOAA
                           29
    Major Insights from Stakeholder Analysis (3)
• Four 3rd Tier stakeholders, providing much less value to
  the program:
1. Defense – different objectives & cultural differences preclude
   significant collaborative efforts with NASA/NOAA
2. Agencies – weak incentives, minimal substantive contributions
   preclude significant collaborative efforts with NASA/NOAA.
   Better to collaborate with International Partners.
3. Media – not as critical to the value chain as in the NASA
   Exploration Program. Ultimate value delivery is science
   knowledge, products & services—not Media stories
4. NGOs – weak influence in value loops, do not return as much
   value to NASA/NOAA as other stakeholders (could this be
   changing?)
                                 30
    Major Insights from Stakeholder Analysis (4)
• It is inherently difficult for NASA/NOAA to achieve
  significant collaboration with Defense, International
  Partners, and other Federal Agencies.




• NASA/NOAA would reap greater benefits from
  collaboration with International Partners than it would
  with Defense or other Federal Agencies.
                             31
    Major Insights from Stakeholder Analysis (5)
• One of Commercial Industry’s most important outputs is
  launch services to NASA/NOAA.
   – Commercially available medium-lift launch vehicle, at
     reasonable cost and high reliability, needed to replace Delta II
     after retirement


• NASA/NOAA’s third most important input is the flow of
  skilled workers from Educators.
   – NASA/NOAA should work closely with Scientists to develop
     Earth science-related educational material to inspire students to
     pursue careers in science and engineering.


                                  32
    Major Insights from Stakeholder Analysis (6)
• The value loop analysis produces an objective ranking
  of the relative importance of each decadal survey
  science category
   – Can provide an objective, transparent metric that can be
     used as a starting point or the basis for prioritization of
     missions from each of the six science categories.




                                  33
    Major Insights from Stakeholder Analysis (7)
• Weather and land-use missions provide roughly the
  same value as climate-related missions.
   – Value primarily delivered as products & services from
     Commercial Data Users to the Public




                                 34
    Major Insights from Stakeholder Analysis (8)
• Climate-related value flows appear in shorter, high-
  scoring value loops

• Weather and land-related value flows appear in longer,
  lower-scoring value loops



    The benefits of climate-related missions may be
    realized more easily or quickly than the benefits
    from weather or land use missions.


                             35
    Major Insights from Stakeholder Analysis (9)

• Level of detail in this stakeholder model not enough to
  adequately distinguish between NASA and NOAA.
   – NASA/NOAA were treated as a single stakeholder for this
     analysis
   – Fuzzy operational boundaries, traditional distinctions blurred
     in decadal survey
   – More in-depth analysis required to determine how
     stakeholder analysis results would differ for NASA and NOAA
     individually




                                  36
   Deriving Program Requirements from
            Value Loop Results
• Program requirements derived from:
  – Most important NASA/NOAA outputs
  – Top-scoring Value loops
• Template:




                      37
 “What” Goals for Earth Observations Program (1)
• NASA shall provide space-acquired data of interest to
  the Scientific Community, as well as funding and access
  to its space systems with the intent of:
   – Generating Earth science knowledge consistent with NASA’s
     science program objectives
   – Fulfilling the recommendations of relevant Science &
     Technology Advisory Bodies
   – Providing the Government with policy-relevant science
     knowledge
   – Providing Educators with inspirational science content to
     promote student interest in science, technology, engineering,
     and mathematics

                                38
 “What” Goals for Earth Observations Program (2)
• NASA shall provide space-acquired Earth observation
  data to Commercial Data Users with the intent of:
   – Providing innovative products and services derived from Earth
     observations data to the Public
• NASA shall develop products and services derived from
  satellite Earth observations for the Public with the intent
  of:
   – Generating public support of NASA’s Earth Observations
     Program
   – Inspiring students to pursue careers in science, technology,
     engineering, and mathematics
   – Generating political support for Earth Observations Programs

                                39
 “What” Goals for Earth Observations Program (3)
• NASA shall develop Earth science-related educational
  material for Educators with the intent of:
   – Inspiring students to pursue careers in science, technology,
     engineering, and mathematics
   – Creating a skilled and educated workforce for the future




                                 40
  “How” Goals for Earth Observations Program (1)
• NASA shall provide information regarding its future
  program plans and priorities to Science & Technology
  Advisory Bodies with the intent of:
   – Obtaining useful science policy advice
   – Influencing the science policy advice given to the Government
   – Providing direction for Scientists to produce sensors, other
     science systems, and Earth science knowledge




                                41
  “How” Goals for Earth Observations Program (2)
• NASA shall provide information about its future program plans to
  the Scientific community with the intent of:
   – Procuring sensors and other science systems
   – Generating Earth science knowledge consistent with NASA’s science
     program objectives
   – Fulfilling the recommendations of relevant Science & Technology Advisory
     Bodies
   – Providing the Government with policy-relevant science knowledge
• NASA shall cooperate with International Partners, including
  providing future plans information and seeking cost-sharing
  arrangements for future missions with the intent of:
   – Providing additional or complementary sources of space-acquired data to
     Scientists
   – Reducing costs or eliminating the need for certain future missions

                                      42
  “How” Goals for Earth Observations Program (3)
• NASA shall provide financial resources and information
  about its future program plans to Commercial Industry
  with the intent of:
   – Supporting the development of launch services for the Earth
     Observations Program
   – Supporting the development of science systems for the Earth
     observations program
• NASA shall comply with policy directives and specific
  program requirements from the Government with the
  intent of:
   – Guaranteeing future funding levels and priorities
   – Ensuring favorable policy direction in the future
                                 43
  “How” Goals for Earth Observations Program (4)
• NASA shall provide stable and rewarding employment to
  its workforce with the intent of:
   – Generating political support for Earth science programs


• NASA shall periodically provide science knowledge,
  opinions, and information about its future program
  plans to the Government with the intent of:
   – Influencing future Earth science program objectives
   – Influencing future funding priorities and levels




                                 44
        Key Recommendations (1)
• Recommendations here represent the most significant
  changes to recommendations in decadal survey
• Changes indicated in bold font




                         45
Key Recommendations (2)




           46
Key Recommendations (3)




           47
Key Recommendations (4)




           48
Backup slides




      49
Level 3 Stakeholder Map




           50
Policy/Opinion Flows




         51
Money Flows




     52
Knowledge/Information Flows




             53
Goods & Services Flows




          54
Jobs & Public Benefit Flows




             55
        Science-Related Value Flows
• Science-related value flows separated into six
  categories corresponding to decadal survey panels
   – Helps produce architecturally distinguishing results




                               56
Stakeholder Interview Template




              57
Internal Assets Used to Connect
       Inputs & Outputs




               58
OPN Model Used to Calculate Value Loops




                   59

								
To top