NASA is Moving to a Formal Lessons Learned Process

Briefing to NASA Academy of Program/Project and

Engineering Leadership (APPEL)

David Oberhettinger Chair, Lessons Learned Committee

Office of the Chief EngineerJet Propulsion Laboratory

May 11, 2006

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology

CL#05-1151: valid for U.S. and foreign release

Office of the Chief Engineer

JDB2May 11, 2006 briefing to APPEL 2

NASA Lessons Learned Initiative

• Why is NASA placing a renewed emphasis on lessons learned?– Repeated mistakes, or violation of known best practices, pose a risk that

is potentially avoidable• “Progress, far from consisting of change, depends on retentiveness... Those

who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” -George Santayana

• “An expert is someone who knows some of the worst mistakes that can be made in his subject, and how to avoid them.” -Werner Karl Heisenberg

– Diaz Report assessed the agency-wide applicability of the CAIB report• “… require that everyone understand their responsibilities and are given the

authority to perform their jobs, with the accountability for their individual and program’s successes and failures, including lessons learned.” (Page 10)

• “The CAIB concluded NASA ‘has not demonstrated the characteristics of a learning organization’ after investigators observed mistakes being repeated and lessons from the past apparently being relearned.” (Page 11)

– GAO report GAO-02-195, Better Mechanisms Needed for Sharing Lessons Learned• “…revealed weaknesses in the collection and sharing of lessons learned

agency-wide.” (Page 3)

Office of the Chief Engineer

JDB3May 11, 2006 briefing to APPEL 3

The Existing NASA LL System

• NASA has maintained a lessons learned system since 1992– NASA Lesson Learned Information System (LLIS) has 1500 lessons, an

an advanced search capability, and is accessed 2500 times per month

– Improvements to the present LLIS are planned to better channel critical engineering information (project documentation, guidance from “experts”) to decision makers

• NASA and the Centers have employed, for the most part, an ad hoc lessons learned process

– Asymmetry of Knowledge [Prusak]: How can you verify that information critical to success has been harvested from persons and organizations where they feast on it to areas where there is famine?

– Lack of a formal, controlled process can lead to ineffective NASA-wide coordination, and ineffective Center solicitation and prioritization of candidates, status tracking, review/approval, dissemination, etc.

Office of the Chief Engineer

JDB4May 11, 2006 briefing to APPEL 4

New LL System Under NPR 7120.6

• NPR 7120.6, The NASA Lessons Learned Process, establishes a formal process with consistent NASA Center and contractor practices

– To help assure that valuable lessons get written and published, that they are well written, and that the essential information gets to the proper recipient when needed

– Each Center is to have a Lessons Learned Committee (LLC) to manage and coordinate the process

– Recommendations are to be “infused” into business practices (procedures, standards and training for engineering/acquisition)

– An effective lessons learned system requires high-level Center commitment, and Center-wide participation in proposing, vetting, disseminating, and using the lessons including project, line, and SMA organizations

– NPR “rollout” workshops have been conducted at all NASA Centers

Office of the Chief Engineer

JDB5May 11, 2006 briefing to APPEL 5

New LL System is Modeled on JPL’s

• In 1984, JPL chartered NASA’s first Lessons Learned Committee (LLC)1. JPL has institutionalized the flow of LL candidates to the LLC (failure

reports, MIB reports, flight project maintains list, informal sources)

2. LLC validates LL candidates and sets priority for writing the LLs• Criteria: (1) Applicable to current/future missions, (2) Vital to flight projects, (3)

Doesn’t duplicate existing LLs

3. The facts (driving event and recommendations) are verified and vetted

4. The LLC, with broad technical representation, “wordsmiths” each line before approving the LL and submitting it to the NASA repository

• JPL decided in 2002 that lessons learned needed to be “infused”1. Iterative review of 1500+ LLs by each flight project is just not practical

2. Close the LL recommendations through the institutional closed-loop corrective action process, resulting in their infusion into JPL business practices with high “velocity” and “viscosity” transfer [Prusak]

Office of the Chief Engineer

JDB6May 11, 2006 briefing to APPEL 6

Summary

• Lessons learned document proven risks: the driving event it describes has occurred at least once, is significant, and may recur– Making the same critical mistake twice is distressing to the person and the

institution

• NPR 7120.6 places new requirements on NASA and the Centers– Lessons learned must compete for the users’ attention. A formal lessons

learned process can help assure that valuable lessons get written and published, that they are well written, and that the essential information gets to the proper recipient when needed

– An effective lessons learned system requires high-level Center commitment, and Center-wide participation in proposing, vetting, disseminating, and using the lessons

• Project, line, and SMA organizations must be involved. A Lessons Learned Committee is needed to manage and coordinate the process

• Effective dissemination and infusion of lessons learned is a major challenge

• NASA OCE recently replaced the NASA Lesson Learned Information System (LLIS) with the NASA Engineering Network (NEN)