{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017735334242837655, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002728512960436562, 'mean_word_length': 5.666666666666667, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evolving management strategies to improve NASA flagship’s cost and schedule performance: LUVOIR as a case study

The large ultraviolet optical infrared surveyor (LUVOIR) study process has brought to fruition an extremely exciting scientific mission concept. The 3.5 year LUVOIR study duration enabled an unprecedented level of scientific, engineering, and technology thoroughness prior to the Astro2020 Decadal. This detail also shed light on many technical and programmatic challenges for efficiently developing a mission of this scale within the context of NASA’s flagships cost and schedule performances to date. While NASA’s flagships perform exquisitely once onorbit, there is understandable growing frustration in their development cost and schedule overruns. We felt it incumbent upon ourselves to ask how we could improve on delivering LUVOIR (or any of NASA’s future flagships) on schedule and on budget, not just for the next mission, but for all NASA large strategic missions to come. We researched past and current NASA flagship’s lessons learned publications and other large government projects that pointed to some systemic challenges that will only grow with larger and more complex strategic missions. Our findings pointed us to some ways that could potentially evolve NASA’s current flagship management practices to help improve on their development cost and schedule performance despite their growing complexity. This paper briefly comments on the motivations for NASA’s flagships and on the science motivations for a LUVOIR-like mission. We argue the incentives for improving NASA’s flagships development cost and schedule performance. We review the specific additional challenges of NASA’s flagships to acknowledge their specific issues. We then examine the most repeated systemic challenges we found from previous NASA flagships and other large government projects lessons learned/observed. Lastly, we offer recommendations to tackle these repeated systemic challenges facing NASA’s flagships. The recommendations culminate into a proactive integrated development and funding framework to enable improving the execution of NASA’s future flagship’s cost and schedule performance.