REG NASA-LLIS-1896-2008 Lessons Learned Functionality of Independent Product Teams.pdf

《REG NASA-LLIS-1896-2008 Lessons Learned Functionality of Independent Product Teams.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《REG NASA-LLIS-1896-2008 Lessons Learned Functionality of Independent Product Teams.pdf（3页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Lessons Learned Entry: 1896Lesson Info:a71 Lesson Number: 1896a71 Lesson Date: 2008-09-4a71 Submitting Organization: KSCa71 Submitted by: Chien Nguyena71 POC Name: Barbara Coxa71 POC Email: Barbara.Cox-1nasa.gova71 POC Phone: 321-476-4059Subject: Functionality of Independent Product Teams Abstract:

2、Independent Product Teams with government, Air Force, contractor and subcontractor members provided a highly structured environment for teamwork to manage a huge contract allowing members to focus on mission. More training for customers on how to evaluate the contractor and a good definition of awar

3、d fee criteria discriminators are required for success. Award fee evaluation inputs should include information on; a. Expectations (what the contract requires) b. Service received c. Consequence and/or impactDescription of Driving Event: The Cape Canaveral Spaceport Management Office used twenty-fiv

4、e Independent Product Teams (IPTs) to manage the Joint Base Operations Support Contract (JBOSC) from 1998 to Sep 2008. These IPTs focused on individual areas of this huge contract teamed by government members of NASA-KSC, Air Force, contractor and subcontractor personnel. This was a huge responsibil

5、ity, successful only because of the complete dedication of the members. Below is a breakdown of lessons learned by members of these teams recorded during their final meetings.Lesson(s) Learned: 1. The team structure was highly functional and consisted of the customer, contractor, subcontractors, and

6、 Cape Canaveral Spaceport Management leadership. Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-2. The team employed a proactive approach and quick resolution of issues 3. Sub-groups of the IPT were used to resolve minor issues and members had the a

7、uthority to act 4. The award fee evaluation spreadsheet for inputs was an excellent tool, but the following columns needed to be added: a. Expectations (what the contract requires) b. Service received c. Consequence and/or impact 5. Management changes caused excessive changes in processes 6. The eva

8、luation was complicated to people outside the IPTs, for instance; a. It was not clear what it took to meet or exceed b. Disproportionate values were given to some issues c. Need to better define a plus versus minus in award fee 7. More training is needed for customers on how to evaluate the contract

9、or and educate them on what to submitRecommendation(s): Integrated Product Teams are very useful and should be used for government and contractor groups. Training is needed for customers on how to evaluate the contractor and educate them on what to submit Award fee evaluation inputs should include i

10、nformation on; a. Expectations (what the contract requires) b. Service received c. Consequence and/or impact Evidence of Recurrence Control Effectiveness: N/ADocuments Related to Lesson: N/AMission Directorate(s): a71 Space OperationsProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitt

11、ed without license from IHS-,-,-Additional Key Phrase(s): a71 Mission Operations and Ground Support Systems.Ground processing and manifestinga71 Additional Categories.Ground OperationsAdditional Info: a71 Project: Joint Program for NASA and USAF on Joint-Base Operations Support ContractApproval Info: a71 Approval Date: 2008-11-14a71 Approval Name: mbella71 Approval Organization: HQProvided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-