1.  Risk Analysis & Management in Student- Centered Spacecraft Development Projects Jeremy Straub 1, Ronald Fevig 2, James Casler 2, Om Yadav 3 1 Department of Computer Science, University of North Dakota 2 Department of Space Studies, University of North Dakota 3 Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering Department, North Dakota State University 1

2. Introduction  Student involvement in small spacecraft development projects:  Provides benefit to the student team members and the project  Introduces significant project risks  Students:  Gain valuable hands-on experience  Demonstrable evidence of their capabilities  The project:  Benefits from having access to intelligent, motivated resources  Benefits from low cost of resources 2

3. Introduction (cont.)  Risks include:  Low-notice-time turnover  Inexperience  Scheduling  Availability difficulties  Difficulty retaining project knowledge  Risks are:  Not the same as in commercial settings  Not well covered by the literature 3

4. Background  Every project has risk factors  The majority of the literature regarding student project participation focuses on benefits students and faculty  Intervening factors that may impair attaining these benefits are not well-examined  Student participation in research is generally believed to be beneficial 4

5. Background (cont.)  Students benefit from confidence, skills and preparation for future studies / workforce entry  Participation benefit increases with prolonged participation  Risk factor actualization can impair long-term student participation  Increases student retention  Helps achieve faculty-member research goals 5

6. Technical, Schedule & Standard Risks Technical:  Construction  Standards-based quality cost-prohibitive to implement  Students may be poorly equipped to detect / evaluate errors  Component  Due to production failures or shipping damage  Inexperience can cause acceptance test / latent issues detection problems  Integration  Assembly design problems  Implementation (physical assembly) issues 6

7. Technical, Schedule & Standard Risks (cont.) Schedule:  Estimation  Inexperience may result in overly positive or overly negative estimates  Both are problematic: overruns or next stage not ready to start  Critical Path  Path of tasks that takes the longest in sequence  Any of these tasks (or others that expand to become a critical path member) that overruns causes schedule issue  Failure (inexperience) to identify precursor / successor tasks can cause  Schedule Creep  Schedule component of scope creek  From accepting changes without updating schedule 7

8. Technical, Schedule & Standard Risks (cont.) Cost:  Estimation  Inexperience can cause over or under estimation  Cost Creep  Cost component of scope creek  Damage & Rework  Broken items being produced or equipment  Due to inexperience or failure to appreciate results of actions  Buying schedule Compression 8

9. Student Worker Involvement Risks  Scheduled Turnover  Has a dramatic impact, but can be planned for  Attributable to students only participating in a given effort for a period of time  Fix with:  Knowledge distribution  Stressing documentation throughout a project’s lifecycle  Validating the usefulness of documentation 9

10. Student Worker Involvement Risks (cont.)  Unscheduled Turnover  Risk factor is present in all types of organizations  In academic environment, augmented by :  Changing student interests (e.g., major)  Student interest in other opportunities  Academically-attributable issues  Diminished level of personal commitment  Mitigation similar to scheduled turnover 10

11. Student Worker Involvement Risks (cont.)  Miss-commitment  Particularly problematic because the individual is still present and ostensibly working on their assigned tasks  Due to conflicting demands for limited time resources the student worker may not have time to make the requisite level of project progress  Compounded by work styles & belief that everything can be ‘made up’ at the last moment.  Project leaders may not be aware of the issue until deadline is missed  Mitigate by:  Define tasks to have demonstrable milestones  Create an environment where challenges are reported  Involve multiple individuals in key tasks 11

12. Student Worker Involvement Risks (cont.)  Inexperience  Students lack practical experience  Misestimating  Lack of experience in problem resolution techniques  Mitigated by training students in the desired behaviors  Mitigation benefits the project and prepares the students for workplace entry 12

13. Analyzing Student Project Risk Four-step process:  Conventional risk elements are identified  Impact of student involvement on these risks is identified  Student-project-specific risks are identified  The impact of risk mitigation efforts is included Mitigation Efforts Likelihood of Project Success Impact of Student Involvement Student Project- Specific Risk Elements Conventional Risk Elements 13

14. Analyzing Student Project Risk (cont.)  Results in a complete understanding of the project’s risk  The model is quite simple  Its use is difficult as a practical matter:  Assessors may fail to identify some risks  Risks may be mis-quantified  Insufficient information may exist to quantify the risks  Student performance of risk analysis for the project introduces the potential for additional issues, due to potential inexperience. 14

15. SQUIRM Risk Model  Combines:  probabilistic assessment of risks inherent to project design  Student Qualitative Undertaking Involvement Risk Model (SQUIRM) based assessment of the risks associated with the utilization of student workers /  Creates a combined risk identification document  Document can be utilized to:  Plan mitigation strategies  Assess the suitability for student involvement  Assess the need for additional oversight where high levels of project risk would be compounded by student involvement Mitigation Efforts Likelihood of Project Success Impact of Student Involvement Student Project- Specific Risk Elements Conventional Risk Elements 15

16. SQUIRM Success Tree 16

17. SQUIRM Risk Model SQUIRM is presented as a qualitative risk model, because:  Insufficient data exists at present to accurately model the impact of involving student workers in a research project  For most projects, implementing basic risk-aware management techniques will maximize the cost-benefit equation  If sufficient data is collected for a given area of focus, worker classification and task set, model can be applied quantitatively. 17

18. Managing Student-Induced Risk  Standard risk mitigation and management approaches should be utilized:  Create systems that will avoid and detect risk occurrence  Create mitigation and response plans for all risks identified and assigned a medium or higher severity level  When designing / applying risk management techniques, student involvement should be considered:  The impact of student involvement on the success or failure of the risk management approach should be considered  The opportunity for student learning from the risk management activities should be considered 18

19. Managing Student-Induced Risk (cont.)  Risk mitigation and management techniques for student-centric risks should be employed:  Offer training regarding workplace conduct expectations, workplace safety and technical aspects of the project  Validate assumptions about student experience  Students may fail to realize or be unwilling to vocalize problem  Knowledge, skill or experience gap.  Manage transitory nature of student-project participants:  Assign deputies to any key position  Ensuring that project knowledge is documented in a known and accessible location. 19

20. Conclusions  If a project doesn’t carry this risk, than its success is likely not a significant accomplishment  Student involvement in a project increases the likelihood and impact of standard-category risks and introduces risk elements that are unique to projects that feature student involvement  While giving it the “good college try” may be sufficient for students to earn passing (even ‘A’-level) grades, this is generally not an acceptable outcome to project faculty members or sponsors who require completion to perform testing and analysis and to publish the research 20

21. Conclusions (cont.)  Student involvement in research activities is becoming an ever-more- integral part of the U.S. collegiate experience  This involvement may peak student interest in pursuing advanced degrees and/or serves to prepare students to analytically solve problems that they will be presented with upon entering the workforce  Student research participation must benefit the student participant, the faculty mentor, and others involved with the research  Proper management, which considers both standard and student- involvement-specific risk factors, of student research projects will not guarantee success. It does, however, its probability 21

22. Thanks for Your Attention & Any Questions Small spacecraft development at the University of North Dakota is supported by the North Dakota Space Grant Consortium, the UND Faculty Research Seed Money Committee, North Dakota NASA EPSCoR and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 22