scope:

Abstract:

Most all projects in today»s environment invariably require the cooperation and support of multiple organizations both in development and acceptance of project deliverables (including multiple government agencies, the project»s customers, educational institutions and potential industry stakeholders and users). With resources scarce at all levels and close oversight and scrutiny (both internally and externally), the importance of the inevitable matrix organizations established to carry out programs and projects from formulation through implementation cannot be overemphasized.

The AATT Project made a significant effort in communicating and developing agreements with key partners such as the FAA, as a primary receiver/user of the Project»s products. A multitude of Memorandum of Understanding/Agreements, etc, were established and utilized during the life of this project. Clearly, the partnership with the FAA proved to be the Project»s greatest challenge.

With continuous management and organizational changes at all levels, policy and procedure changes, etc., AATT experienced problems, as grouped and summarized below:

A. Interacting with, and learning to work with an entirely different federal agency such as the FAA: It took much time and resources to experience and understand key cultural and organizational differences involving everything from policy, procedures, politics, and communication processes in both technical and administrative/management domains. Comments at all levels across the AATT Project demonstrate that this was one of the most significant ongoing challenges. The FAA failed for a number of reasons to provide consistent single points of contact (POC) for any appreciable length of time. One manager reports that "the average life" of an FAA POC has been less than 2 years". Also, unexpected union issues and concerns ensued with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) and the Professional Airways Systems Specialists (PASS), which were increased since AATT had a presence at more than one FAA facility. To further complicate things, continual shifts and/orreorganizations within the FAA resulted in AATT technology being moved from organization to organization constantly requiring NASA managers and researchers to educate and establish relationships with new FAA personnel.

B. Resource Support: As the AATT Project matured, FAA commitments to provide joint support funding, personnel and/or facilities declined for a number of reasons. AATT learned the high risk this really is from the start and how it can lead to de-scoping, schedule delays or tradeoffs not originally foreseen.

C. Technical Transfer of Project Products: AATT invested much time and energy in working with a number of FAA POCs at various levels to establish an agreed upon process and understanding of technologies to be passed on for further development and implementation into the National Airspace System (NAS). The FAA has stated that they are often unprepared for the research NASA develops that they are then expected to further develop and implement into the operational environment. The AATT tailored TRL (Technology Readiness Level) process has been used for these purposes. An ongoing problem AATT has experienced is the FAA»s desire and need to know how a newly developed NASA technology being handed over, will fit into the evolving NAS.

D. External Agreements and Management Support: As indicated above, the AATT Project was subjected to much instability and organizational dynamics in its relationship to the FAA. Formal agreements that were made and in place between the FAA and the AATT Project regarding technologies to be prototyped, demonstrated, and transferred in support of stakeholder requirements were ignored. In light of this, it is crucial to gain long-term top-level management support from any and all key participating organizations including necessary resource commitments.