ISO 21349:2023
(Main)Space systems — Project reviews
Space systems — Project reviews
This document specifies process requirements for project reviews as a set of required functions. It establishes requirements and recommendations on the function inputs, outputs, mechanisms and controlling conditions. This document specifies the responsibilities of a review board and gives guidance concerning review board composition. This document also provides descriptions of the kinds of reviews that are commonly useful in assuring the success of a space project. This document is applicable to status reviews for a project at any level within a larger project, as well as for major milestone reviews at the top level of a major project. It is intended to be used either by an independent developer as a basis for enterprise processes, or as a basis for an agreement between a supplier and a customer. It is intended for use in implementing the review requirements of ISO 14300-1, and ISO 14300-2, ISO 15865 and such other space systems and operations standards that require formal reviews.
Systèmes spatiaux — Revue des projets
General Information
Relations
Buy Standard
Standards Content (Sample)
INTERNATIONAL ISO
STANDARD 21349
Second edition
2023-04
Space systems — Project reviews
Systèmes spatiaux — Revue des projets
Reference number
ISO 21349:2023(E)
© ISO 2023
---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
ISO 21349:2023(E)
COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT
© ISO 2023
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on
the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below
or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------
ISO 21349:2023(E)
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 General . 3
4.1 Purpose of a review . . 3
4.2 Process model. 3
4.2.1 Function hierarchy . 3
4.2.2 Co-ordination of functions . 4
4.3 Review context . 4
4.4 Preconditions for a review . . 5
4.4.1 General preconditions . 5
4.4.2 Specific preconditions . 6
5 Review process . 6
5.1 Overview of required review functions . 6
5.2 Initiate review process . 7
5.2.1 Overview . 7
5.2.2 Select review board chairperson . 8
5.2.3 Select review board members . 8
5.2.4 Select project review team . 8
5.2.5 Establish review plan . 8
5.3 Prepare and publish evidence . 9
5.3.1 Overview . 9
5.3.2 Publish initial review material . 10
5.3.3 Answer questions . 10
5.4 Assess project status . 10
5.4.1 Overview . 10
5.4.2 Evaluate quality of evidence . 11
5.4.3 Evaluate achievements . 11
5.5 Conclude review .12
5.5.1 Overview . 12
5.5.2 Establish recommendations .12
5.5.3 Prepare action plan . 13
5.5.4 Evaluate and decide .13
5.5.5 Close review . 13
6 Reviews designated in ISO 14300-1 .13
Annex A (informative) Main elements of the process diagrams .15
Annex B (informative) Other reviews .17
Bibliography .19
iii
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------
ISO 21349:2023(E)
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO document should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
ISO draws attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the use
of (a) patent(s). ISO takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any claimed
patent rights in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, ISO had not received
notice of (a) patent(s) which may be required to implement this document. However, implementers are
cautioned that this may not represent the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent
database available at www.iso.org/patents. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all
such patent rights.
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to
the World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see
www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 20, Aircraft and space vehicles,
Subcommittee SC 14, Space systems and operations.
This second edition cancels and replaces the first edition (ISO 21349:2007), which has been technically
revised.
The main changes are as follows:
— updated normative references in Clause 2;
— updated terms and definition in Clause 3;
— deleted numerical syntax of the IDEF0 standard in Clauses 4 and 5;
— deleted information about IEEE Std. 1320.1-1998 in 4.2.1;
— minor changes in 4.3, 5.4.1, 5.4.3, 5.5.1, 5.5.3 and in Annex A;
— added ISO/TS 18667 and ISO 18676 in the Bibliography.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.
iv
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------
ISO 21349:2023(E)
Introduction
Space systems are very complex, incorporating many different technologies. Space programmes can
last for many years, progressing through several different stages from conception to disposal or other
disposition. When a space programme advances from one stage to another, substantial changes in the
type and amount of resources required can occur. In addition, there can be attendant risks to either the
success of the project or to the well-being of project equipment or to personnel. Well-regulated project
reviews can be an important factor in ensuring that all factors are ready for these changes, and that
the risks are well understood and accepted. This document is intended to be used as a basis for the
activities comprising a review, their necessary resources, controls, inputs and results to enhance the
communication between different organizations that participate in a review process and to reduce the
costs of planning and performing reviews.
v
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO 21349:2023(E)
Space systems — Project reviews
1 Scope
This document specifies process requirements for project reviews as a set of required functions.
It establishes requirements and recommendations on the function inputs, outputs, mechanisms and
controlling conditions.
This document specifies the responsibilities of a review board and gives guidance concerning review
board composition.
This document also provides descriptions of the kinds of reviews that are commonly useful in assuring
the success of a space project.
This document is applicable to status reviews for a project at any level within a larger project, as well
as for major milestone reviews at the top level of a major project. It is intended to be used either by an
independent developer as a basis for enterprise processes, or as a basis for an agreement between a
supplier and a customer. It is intended for use in implementing the review requirements of ISO 14300-1,
and ISO 14300-2, ISO 15865 and such other space systems and operations standards that require formal
reviews.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For
undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO 10795, Space systems — Programme management and quality — Vocabulary
ISO 17666, Space systems — Risk management
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in ISO 10795 and the following apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https:// www .electropedia .org/ .
3.1
independent expert
person highly qualified in some aspect of the technical content of the project review (3.7) who does not
have a personal conflict of interest concerning the outcome of the review
3.2
milestone
designated project status that indicates the amount of progress made toward project completion, or
that should be achieved before the project proceeds to a new phase
3.3
milestone criteria
observable facts that indicate a milestone (3.2) has been reached
1
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------
ISO 21349:2023(E)
3.4
project data files
collection of requirements, specifications, plans, technical result documentation and all other project
data that serves to represent the project status
3.5
project decision authority
entity with authority to certify that the preconditions for a review are met, to initiate the review
process, to reach decisions on the review board (3.9) recommendations and to cause the agreed project
actions to be carried out
3.6
project expert
person well acquainted with the project status and documentation and highly qualified in some area of
the technical content of the project review (3.7)
3.7
project review
formal collection and evaluation of evidence of project status, along with identifying issues and
necessary corrective actions, to determine that the objectives and success criteria of a review milestone
(3.2) have been met
3.8
project review team
body consisting of project experts (3.6), charged with preparing all evidence for the review and
formulating responses to action items
Note 1 to entry: The best practice for conducting a review involves two separate teams of experts: the project
review team and the review board (3.9). The project review team is composed of persons well acquainted with
the project and is responsible for assembling information concerning the actual status of the project.
3.9
review board
body, organized into sub-entities, as necessary, consisting of a review board chairperson (3.10) or
delegated person and review board members (3.11), charged with evaluating the evidence of project
status, along with identifying issues and necessary corrective actions, to determine that the objectives
and success criteria of a review milestone (3.2) have been met
Note 1 to entry: The purpose of the review board is to prepare an objective evaluation of the project status.
Achievement of an objective evaluation is aided by use of independent experts (3.1) who have no prior association
with the project and no personal conflict of interest with respect to the outcome of the review.
3.10
review board chairperson
leader of the review board (3.9), who approves the review policy (3.12), objectives, success criteria,
organization of the review board and nomination of review board members (3.11)
3.11
review board member
independent expert (3.1), sometimes termed a subject matter expert, who is a participant in the review
board (3.9)
3.12
review policy
policy that provides either requirements or guidance (or both) for the overall conduct of the review
2
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------
ISO 21349:2023(E)
4 General
4.1 Purpose of a review
The purpose of a project review is to establish whether the project has reached a defined project
milestone and to identify specific actions necessary for the project to proceed to the next phase.
NOTE The flow of activities to achieve this purpose is one of identifying the participants and the plan,
preparing the evidence of the project status, evaluating the evidence relative to milestone criteria, followed by
a preparation of specific recommendations based on the evaluation and performing actions identified by the
review.
Typical milestones and their relation to space project phases are defined in ISO 14300-1, ISO 14300-2
and in Clause 6.
4.2 Process model
4.2.1 Function hierarchy
For reference, the essential features of the review process modelling syntax and semantics used in this
document are summarized in Annex A.
For clarity in communicating the relationships between the review functions, the model is construed
as a three-level hierarchy of functions, as shown in Figure 1. This hierarchy can be used for guidance in
planning reviews; but for a conforming application of this document, use of this hierarchy to represent
the process is not required.
In a conforming application, the twelve functions at the third level of the hierarchy of Figure 1 shall be
implemented. Detailed requirements and guidance for these functions are given in Clause 5.
Figure 1 — Function hierarchy
3
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------
ISO 21349:2023(E)
4.2.2 Co-ordination of functions
A function may be performed concurrently with any other function and in any order that is appropriate,
so long as the necessary inputs, controls and mechanisms are in place for the performance of the
function. The performance of a function may be interrupted if this is appropriate, for example, because
of resource conflicts.
In many cases the inputs, outputs and controls can consist of many increments of data or other material
that are available at distributed times. Similarly, not all personnel participating in implementing a
function are needed for the production of some specific increment of output. In these cases, outputs
may be produced incrementally, rather than held until the total output has been completed.
4.3 Review context
The review context, corresponding to level 0 of Figure 1, is shown in Figure 2. The central box represents
the function performed by the complete review process. The function of the review process, as stated
in 4.1, is to evaluate project status relative to a specified project milestone. For the purposes of the
diagram, this is abbreviated to “Evaluate project status”. The incoming arrows at the top and bottom,
and on the left of the function box represent necessary preconditions for the review to be performed.
Specifically:
a) the review process is controlled by the project review policy and the milestone criteria;
b) the input to the review process is the total set of project data files;
c) the mechanism for performing the review process includes
1) available independent experts,
2) available project experts, and
3) the project decision authority.
Requirements for these preconditions are given in 4.4.
The concrete result of the review is an agreed report of conclusions, recommendations and action items,
and an approved plan for resolving any remaining problems. These outputs are shown on the right of
the function box in Figure 2. Requirements for these outputs are given in 5.5.
Models in general include factors that are important from a certain viewpoint. The review process
model used in this document uses the viewpoint of project management.
4
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------
ISO 21349:2023(E)
Figure 2 — Context diagram for the top-level function “Evaluate project status”
4.4 Preconditions for a review
4.4.1 General preconditions
4.4.1.1 Project review policy
The project shall have a review policy. Factors that should be considered for inclusion in the review
policy include the following:
a) selection of review board chairperson and review board members;
b) qualifications of review board members;
c) number of review board members and distribution of technical exp
...
FINAL DRAFT INTERNATIONAL STANDARD
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
ISO TC 20/SC14/WG 5
Secretariat: ANSI/AIAA
Second edition
Date: 2022-09-2001-06
Space systems — Project reviews
Systèmes spatiaux — Revue des projets
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
© ISO 20222023
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation,
no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on the internet or an intranet,
without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address
below or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Fax: +41 22 749 09 47
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii © ISO 2022 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
Contents Page
Foreword . iv
Introduction . v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 General . 3
4.1 Purpose of a review . 3
4.2 Process model . 3
4.3 Review context . 4
4.4 Preconditions for a review . 5
5 Review process . 7
5.1 Overview of required review functions . 7
5.2 Initiate review process . 7
5.3 Prepare and publish evidence . 8
5.4 Assess project status . 11
5.5 Conclude review . 13
6 Reviews designated in ISO 14300-1 . 15
Annex A (informative) Main elements of the process diagrams . 17
Annex B (informative) Other reviews . 19
Bibliography . 21
© ISO 20222023 – All rights reserved iii
---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national
standards bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally
carried out through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a
technical committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee.
International organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in
the work. ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all
matters of electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of
any patent rights identified during the development of the document will be in the Introduction and/or
on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see www.iso.org/patents).
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the
World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see
www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 20, Aircraft and space vehicles,
Subcommittee SC 14, Space systems and operations.
This second edition cancels and replaces the first edition (ISO 21349:2007), which has been technically
revised.
The main changes are as follows:
— updated normative references in ClausesClause 2;
— updated terms and definition in Clause 3;
— deleted numerical syntax of the IDEF0 standard in Clauses 4 and 5;
— deleted information about IEEE Std. 1320.1-1998 in 4.2.1;
— minor changes in 4.3, 5.4.1, 5.4.3, 5.5.1, 5.5.3 and in Annex A;
— added ISO/TS 18667 and ISO 18676 in the Bibliography.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.
iv © ISO 2022 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
Introduction
Space systems are very complex, incorporating many different technologies. Space programmes can last
for many years, progressing through several different stages from conception to disposal or other
disposition. When a space programme advances from one stage to another, substantial changes in the
type and amount of resources required can occur. In addition, there can be attendant risks to either the
success of the project or to the well-being of project equipment or to personnel. Well-regulated project
reviews can be an important factor in ensuring that all factors are ready for these changes, and that the
risks are well understood and accepted. This document is intended to be used as a basis for the
activities comprising a review, their necessary resources, controls, inputs and results to enhance the
communication between different organizations that participate in a review process and to reduce the
costs of planning and performing reviews.
© ISO 20222023 – All rights reserved v
---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------
FINAL DRAFT INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
Space systems — Project reviews
1 Scope
This document specifies process requirements for project reviews as a set of required functions. It
establishes requirements and recommendations on the function inputs, outputs, mechanisms and
controlling conditions.
This document specifies the responsibilities of a review board and gives guidance concerning review
board composition.
This document also provides descriptions of the kinds of reviews that are commonly useful in assuring
the success of a space project.
This document is applicable to status reviews for a project at any level within a larger project, as well as
for major milestone reviews at the top level of a major project. It is intended to be used either by an
independent developer as a basis for enterprise processes, or as a basis for an agreement between a
supplier and a customer. It is intended for use in implementing the review requirements of ISO 14300-
1, and ISO 14300-2, ISO 15865 and such other space systems and operations standards that require
formal reviews.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For
undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO 10795, Space systems — Programme management and quality — Vocabulary
ISO 14300-1, Space systems — Programme management — Part 1: Structuring of a project
ISO 14300-2, Space systems — Programme management — Part 2: Product assurance
ISO 17666, Space systems — Risk management
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions given in ISO 10795 and the
following apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https://www.iso.org/obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https://www.electropedia.org/.
3.1
independent expert
© ISO 2022 – All rights reserved 1
---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
person highly qualified in some aspect of the technical content of the project review (3.7) who does not
have a personal conflict of interest concerning the outcome of the review
3.2
milestone
designated project status that indicates the amount of progress made toward project completion, or
that should be achieved before the project proceeds to a new phase
3.3
milestone criteria
observable facts that indicate a milestone (3.2) has been reached
3.4
project data files
collection of requirements, specifications, plans, technical result documentation and all other project
data that serves to represent the project status
3.5
project decision authority
entity with authority to certify that the preconditions for a review are met, to initiate the review
process, to reach decisions on the review board (3.9) recommendations and to cause the agreed project
actions to be carried out
3.6
project expert
person well acquainted with the project status and documentation and highly qualified in some area of
the technical content of the project review (3.7)
3.7
project review
formal collection and evaluation of evidence of project status, along with identifying issues and
necessary corrective actions, to determine that the objectives and success criteria of a review milestone
(3.2) have been met
3.8
project review team
body consisting of project experts (3.6), charged with preparing all evidence for the review and
formulating responses to action items
Note 1 to entry: The best practice for conducting a review involves two separate teams of experts: the project
review team and the review board (3.9). The project review team is composed of persons well acquainted with the
project and is responsible for assembling information concerning the actual status of the project.
3.9
review board
body, organized into sub-entities, as necessary, consisting of a review board chairperson (3.10) or
delegated person and review board members (3.11), charged with evaluating the evidence of project
status, along with identifying issues and necessary corrective actions, to determine that the objectives
and success criteria of a review milestone (3.2) have been met
Note 1 to entry: The purpose of the review board is to prepare an objective evaluation of the project status.
Achievement of an objective evaluation is aided by use of independent experts (3.1) who have no prior association
with the project and no personal conflict of interest with respect to the outcome of the review.
3.10
2 © ISO 20222023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
review board chairperson
leader of the review board (3.9), who approves the review policy (3.12), objectives, success criteria,
organization of the review board and nomination of review board members (3.11)
3.11
review board member
independent expert (3.1), sometimes termed a subject matter expert, who is a participant in the review
board (3.9)
3.12
review policy
policy that provides either requirements or guidance (or both) for the overall conduct of the review
4 General
4.1 Purpose of a review
The purpose of a project review is to establish whether the project has reached a defined project
milestone and to identify specific actions necessary for the project to proceed to the next phase.
NOTE The flow of activities to achieve this purpose is one of identifying the participants and the plan, preparing
the evidence of the project status, evaluating the evidence relative to milestone criteria, followed by a preparation
of specific recommendations based on the evaluation and performing actions identified by the review.
Typical milestones and their relation to space project phases are defined in ISO 14300-1 in, ISO 14300-
2 and in Clause 6,.
4.2 Process model
4.2.1 Function hierarchy
For reference, the essential features of the review process modelling syntax and semantics used in this
document are summarized in Annex A.
For clarity in communicating the relationships between the review functions, the model is construed as
a three-level hierarchy of functions, as shown in Figure 1. This hierarchy can be used for guidance in
planning reviews; but for a conforming application of this document, use of this hierarchy to represent
the process is not required.
In a conforming application, the twelve functions at the third level of the hierarchy of Figure 1 shall be
implemented. Detailed requirements and guidance for these functions are given in Clause 5.
© ISO 20222023 – All rights reserved 3
---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
Figure 1 — Function hierarchy
4 © ISO 20222023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
4.2.2 Co-ordination of functions
A function may be performed concurrently with any other function and in any order that is appropriate,
so long as the necessary inputs, controls and mechanisms are in place for the performance of the
function. The performance of a function may be interrupted if this is appropriate, for example, because
of resource conflicts.
In many cases the inputs, outputs and controls can consist of many increments of data or other material
that are available at distributed times. Similarly, not all personnel participating in implementing a
function are needed for the production of some specific increment of output. In these cases, outputs
may be produced incrementally, rather than held until the total output has been completed.
4.3 Review context
The review context, corresponding to level 0 of Figure 1, is shown in Figure 2. The central box
represents the function performed by the complete review process. The function of the review process,
as stated in 4.1, is to evaluate project status relative to a specified project milestone. For the purposes of
the diagram, this is abbreviated to “Evaluate project status”. The incoming arrows at the top and
bottom, and on the left of the function box represent necessary preconditions for the review to be
performed. Specifically:
a) the review process is controlled by the project review policy and the milestone criteria;
b) the input to the review process is the total set of project data files;
c) the mechanism for performing the review process includes
1) available independent experts,
2) available project experts, and
3) the project decision authority.
Requirements for these preconditions are given in 4.4.
The concrete result of the review is an agreed report of conclusions, recommendations and action
items, and an approved plan for resolving any remaining problems. These outputs are shown on the
right of the function box in Figure 2. Requirements for these outputs are given in 5.5.
Models in general include factors that are important from a certain viewpoint. The review process
model used in this document uses the viewpoint of project management.
© ISO 20222023 – All rights reserved 5
---------------------- Page: 10 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
Figure 2 — Context diagram for the top-level function “Evaluate project status”
6 © ISO 20222023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 11 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
4.4 Preconditions for a review
4.4.1 General preconditions
4.4.1.1 Project review policy
The project shall have a review policy. Factors that should be considered for inclusion in the review
policy include the following:
a) selection of review board chairperson and review board members;
b) qualifications of review board members;
c) number of review board members and distribution of technical expertise;
d) style, format and medium of review publications, presentations and responses;
e) rules of order for conduct of meetings;
f) rules and procedures for the review board to reach recommendations;
g) rules and procedures for reaching decisions which involve both the project decision authority and
the review board;
h) selection of members of the project review team;
i) establishment of a review plan.
4.4.1.2 Project decision authority
The project decision authority for the review shall be identified.
The project decision authority may be a single individual or a group of individuals that can reach a
decision by vote, consensus or some other established method.
In a project carried out under a contract between two or more parties, the contract should define the
project decision authority for each review or type of review.
NOTE The project decision authority can, depending on the terms of a contract, include representatives of the
customer, the supplier, or both the customer and the supplier. In the case of internal reviews, it can consist solely
of representatives of the supplier.
4.4.1.3 Milestone criteria
The project shall have measurable criteria for assessing whether or not a milestone has been reached.
These criteria shall include:
— identification of technical achievements;
— specification of how each technical achievement is to be evaluated for completeness and
correctness.
4.4.2 Specific preconditions
4.4.2.1 Milestone criteria
A project can have internal progress reviews that result in changes in the overall project plan and
changes in the specific milestone criteria. Such changes can also result from prior milestone review
© ISO 20222023 – All rights reserved 7
---------------------- Page: 12 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:20222023(E)
action items. Replanning can also result from a variety of other factors. The project decision authority
should confirm that milestone criteria to be used for the review are valid, taking into account any
replanning that has occurred.
4.4.2.2 Technical preconditions
Conducting of the review depends on technical evidence. Examples of such evidence include test results,
simulation results, trade-off studies, equipment inspections and analyses. The project decision
authority should ensure that evidence appropriate to the milestone exists in the project data files and
should receive assurance that project personnel believe this evidence will support an assessment that
the milestone has been achieved.
4.4.2.3 Certification of precond
...
FINAL
INTERNATIONAL ISO/FDIS
DRAFT
STANDARD 21349
ISO/TC 20/SC 14
Space systems — Project reviews
Secretariat: ANSI
Voting begins on: Systèmes spatiaux — Revue des projets
2023-01-20
Voting terminates on:
2023-03-17
RECIPIENTS OF THIS DRAFT ARE INVITED TO
SUBMIT, WITH THEIR COMMENTS, NOTIFICATION
OF ANY RELEVANT PATENT RIGHTS OF WHICH
THEY ARE AWARE AND TO PROVIDE SUPPOR TING
DOCUMENTATION.
IN ADDITION TO THEIR EVALUATION AS
Reference number
BEING ACCEPTABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL, TECHNO-
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
LOGICAL, COMMERCIAL AND USER PURPOSES,
DRAFT INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS MAY ON
OCCASION HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE
LIGHT OF THEIR POTENTIAL TO BECOME STAN-
DARDS TO WHICH REFERENCE MAY BE MADE IN
NATIONAL REGULATIONS. © ISO 2023
---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
FINAL
INTERNATIONAL ISO/FDIS
DRAFT
STANDARD 21349
ISO/TC 20/SC 14
Space systems — Project reviews
Secretariat: ANSI
Voting begins on: Systèmes spatiaux — Revue des projets
Voting terminates on:
COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT
© ISO 2023
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on
the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below
or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
RECIPIENTS OF THIS DRAFT ARE INVITED TO
ISO copyright office
SUBMIT, WITH THEIR COMMENTS, NOTIFICATION
OF ANY RELEVANT PATENT RIGHTS OF WHICH
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
THEY ARE AWARE AND TO PROVIDE SUPPOR TING
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
DOCUMENTATION.
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
IN ADDITION TO THEIR EVALUATION AS
Reference number
Email: copyright@iso.org
BEING ACCEPTABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL, TECHNO
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
Website: www.iso.org
LOGICAL, COMMERCIAL AND USER PURPOSES,
DRAFT INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS MAY ON
Published in Switzerland
OCCASION HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE
LIGHT OF THEIR POTENTIAL TO BECOME STAN
DARDS TO WHICH REFERENCE MAY BE MADE IN
ii
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
NATIONAL REGULATIONS. © ISO 2023
---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 General . 3
4.1 Purpose of a review . . 3
4.2 Process model. 3
4.2.1 Function hierarchy . 3
4.2.2 Coordination of functions . 4
4.3 Review context . 4
4.4 Preconditions for a review . . 5
4.4.1 General preconditions . 5
4.4.2 Specific preconditions . 6
5 Review process . 6
5.1 Overview of required review functions . 6
5.2 Initiate review process . 7
5.2.1 Overview . 7
5.2.2 Select review board chairperson . 8
5.2.3 Select review board members . 8
5.2.4 Select project review team . 8
5.2.5 Establish review plan . 8
5.3 Prepare and publish evidence . 9
5.3.1 Overview . 9
5.3.2 Publish initial review material . 10
5.3.3 Answer questions . 10
5.4 Assess project status . 10
5.4.1 Overview . 10
5.4.2 Evaluate quality of evidence . 11
5.4.3 Evaluate achievements . 11
5.5 Conclude review .12
5.5.1 Overview . 12
5.5.2 Establish recommendations .12
5.5.3 Prepare action plan . 13
5.5.4 Evaluate and decide .13
5.5.5 Close review . 13
6 Reviews designated in ISO 14300-1 .13
Annex A (informative) Main elements of the process diagrams .15
Annex B (informative) Other reviews .17
Bibliography .19
iii
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and nongovernmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of
any patent rights identified during the development of the document will be in the Introduction and/or
on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see www.iso.org/patents).
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to
the World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see
www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 20, Aircraft and space vehicles,
Subcommittee SC 14, Space systems and operations.
This second edition cancels and replaces the first edition (ISO 21349:2007), which has been technically
revised.
The main changes are as follows:
— updated normative references in Clause 2;
— updated terms and definition in Clause 3;
— deleted numerical syntax of the IDEF0 standard in Clauses 4 and 5;
— deleted information about IEEE Std. 1320.11998 in 4.2.1;
— minor changes in 4.3, 5.4.1, 5.4.3, 5.5.1, 5.5.3 and in Annex A;
— added ISO/TS 18667 and ISO 18676 in the Bibliography.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.
iv
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
Introduction
Space systems are very complex, incorporating many different technologies. Space programmes can
last for many years, progressing through several different stages from conception to disposal or other
disposition. When a space programme advances from one stage to another, substantial changes in the
type and amount of resources required can occur. In addition, there can be attendant risks to either the
success of the project or to the well-being of project equipment or to personnel. Well-regulated project
reviews can be an important factor in ensuring that all factors are ready for these changes, and that
the risks are well understood and accepted. This document is intended to be used as a basis for the
activities comprising a review, their necessary resources, controls, inputs and results to enhance the
communication between different organizations that participate in a review process and to reduce the
costs of planning and performing reviews.
v
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------
FINAL DRAFT INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
Space systems — Project reviews
1 Scope
This document specifies process requirements for project reviews as a set of required functions.
It establishes requirements and recommendations on the function inputs, outputs, mechanisms and
controlling conditions.
This document specifies the responsibilities of a review board and gives guidance concerning review
board composition.
This document also provides descriptions of the kinds of reviews that are commonly useful in assuring
the success of a space project.
This document is applicable to status reviews for a project at any level within a larger project, as well
as for major milestone reviews at the top level of a major project. It is intended to be used either by an
independent developer as a basis for enterprise processes, or as a basis for an agreement between a
supplier and a customer. It is intended for use in implementing the review requirements of ISO 14300-1,
and ISO 14300-2, ISO 15865 and such other space systems and operations standards that require formal
reviews.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For
undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO 10795, Space systems — Programme management and quality — Vocabulary
ISO 17666, Space systems — Risk management
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in ISO 10795 and the following apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https:// www .electropedia .org/ .
3.1
independent expert
person highly qualified in some aspect of the technical content of the project review (3.7) who does not
have a personal conflict of interest concerning the outcome of the review
3.2
milestone
designated project status that indicates the amount of progress made toward project completion, or
that should be achieved before the project proceeds to a new phase
3.3
milestone criteria
observable facts that indicate a milestone (3.2) has been reached
1
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
3.4
project data files
collection of requirements, specifications, plans, technical result documentation and all other project
data that serves to represent the project status
3.5
project decision authority
entity with authority to certify that the preconditions for a review are met, to initiate the review
process, to reach decisions on the review board (3.9) recommendations and to cause the agreed project
actions to be carried out
3.6
project expert
person well acquainted with the project status and documentation and highly qualified in some area of
the technical content of the project review (3.7)
3.7
project review
formal collection and evaluation of evidence of project status, along with identifying issues and
necessary corrective actions, to determine that the objectives and success criteria of a review milestone
(3.2) have been met
3.8
project review team
body consisting of project experts (3.6), charged with preparing all evidence for the review and
formulating responses to action items
Note 1 to entry: The best practice for conducting a review involves two separate teams of experts: the project
review team and the review board (3.9). The project review team is composed of persons well acquainted with
the project and is responsible for assembling information concerning the actual status of the project.
3.9
review board
body, organized into sub-entities, as necessary, consisting of a review board chairperson (3.10) or
delegated person and review board members (3.11), charged with evaluating the evidence of project
status, along with identifying issues and necessary corrective actions, to determine that the objectives
and success criteria of a review milestone (3.2) have been met
Note 1 to entry: The purpose of the review board is to prepare an objective evaluation of the project status.
Achievement of an objective evaluation is aided by use of independent experts (3.1) who have no prior association
with the project and no personal conflict of interest with respect to the outcome of the review.
3.10
review board chairperson
leader of the review board (3.9), who approves the review policy (3.12), objectives, success criteria,
organization of the review board and nomination of review board members (3.11)
3.11
review board member
independent expert (3.1), sometimes termed a subject matter expert, who is a participant in the review
board (3.9)
3.12
review policy
policy that provides either requirements or guidance (or both) for the overall conduct of the review
2
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
4 General
4.1 Purpose of a review
The purpose of a project review is to establish whether the project has reached a defined project
milestone and to identify specific actions necessary for the project to proceed to the next phase.
NOTE The flow of activities to achieve this purpose is one of identifying the participants and the plan,
preparing the evidence of the project status, evaluating the evidence relative to milestone criteria, followed by
a preparation of specific recommendations based on the evaluation and performing actions identified by the
review.
Typical milestones and their relation to space project phases are defined in ISO 14300-1, ISO 14300-2
and in Clause 6.
4.2 Process model
4.2.1 Function hierarchy
For reference, the essential features of the review process modelling syntax and semantics used in this
document are summarized in Annex A.
For clarity in communicating the relationships between the review functions, the model is construed
as a three-level hierarchy of functions, as shown in Figure 1. This hierarchy can be used for guidance in
planning reviews; but for a conforming application of this document, use of this hierarchy to represent
the process is not required.
In a conforming application, the twelve functions at the third level of the hierarchy of Figure 1 shall be
implemented. Detailed requirements and guidance for these functions are given in Clause 5.
Figure 1 — Function hierarchy
3
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
4.2.2 Co-ordination of functions
A function may be performed concurrently with any other function and in any order that is appropriate,
so long as the necessary inputs, controls and mechanisms are in place for the performance of the
function. The performance of a function may be interrupted if this is appropriate, for example, because
of resource conflicts.
In many cases the inputs, outputs and controls can consist of many increments of data or other material
that are available at distributed times. Similarly, not all personnel participating in implementing a
function are needed for the production of some specific increment of output. In these cases, outputs
may be produced incrementally, rather than held until the total output has been completed.
4.3 Review context
The review context, corresponding to level 0 of Figure 1, is shown in Figure 2. The central box represents
the function performed by the complete review process. The function of the review process, as stated
in 4.1, is to evaluate project status relative to a specified project milestone. For the purposes of the
diagram, this is abbreviated to “Evaluate project status”. The incoming arrows at the top and bottom,
and on the left of the function box represent necessary preconditions for the review to be performed.
Specifically:
a) the review process is controlled by the project review policy and the milestone criteria;
b) the input to the review process is the total set of project data files;
c) the mechanism for performing the review process includes
1) available independent experts,
2) available project experts, and
3) the project decision authority.
Requirements for these preconditions are given in 4.4.
The concrete result of the review is an agreed report of conclusions, recommendations and action items,
and an approved plan for resolving any remaining problems. These outputs are shown on the right of
the function box in Figure 2. Requirements for these outputs are given in 5.5.
Models in general include factors that are important from a certain viewpoint. The review process
model used in this document uses the viewpoint of project management.
4
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
Figure 2 — Context diagram for the top-level function “Evaluate project status”
4.4 Preconditions for a review
4.4.1 General preconditions
4.4.1.1 Project review policy
The project shall have a review policy. Factors that should be considered for inclusion in the review
policy include the following:
a) selection of review board chairperson and review board members;
b) qualifications of review board members;
c) number of review board members and distribution of technical expertise;
d) style, format and medium of review publications, presentations and responses;
e) rules of order for conduct of meetings;
f) rules and procedures for the review board to reach recommendations;
g) rules and procedures for reaching decisions which involve both the project decision authority and
the review board;
h) selection of members of the project review team;
i) establishment of a review plan.
4.4.1.2 Project decision authority
The project decision authority for the review shall be identified.
5
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 10 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
The project decision authority may be a single individual or a group of individuals that can reach a
decision by vote, consensus or some other established method.
In a project carried out under a contract between two or more parties, the contract should define the
project decision authority for each review or type of review.
NOTE The project decision authority can, depending on the terms of a contract, include representatives of
the customer, the supplier, or both the customer and the supplier. In the case of internal reviews, it can consist
solely of representatives of the supplier.
4.4.1.3 Milestone criteria
The project shall have measurable criteria for assessing whether or not a milestone has been reached.
These criteria shall include:
— identification of technical achievements;
— specification of how each technical achievement is to be evaluated for completeness and correctness.
4.4.2 Specific preconditions
4.4.2.1 Milestone criteria
A project can have internal progress reviews that result in changes in the overall project plan and
changes in the specific milestone criteria. Such changes can also result from prior milestone review
action items. Replanning can also result from a variety of other factors. The project decision authority
should confirm that milestone criteria to be used for the review are valid, taking into account any
replanning that has occurred.
4.4.2.2 Technical preconditions
Conducting of the review depends on technical evidence. Examples of such evidence include test
results, simulation results, trade-off studies, equipment inspections and analyses. The project decision
authority should ensure that evidence appropriate to the milestone exists in the project data files and
should receive assurance that project personnel believe this evidence will support an assessment that
the milestone has been achieved.
4.4.2.3 Certification of precondition conformance and deviations
The project decision authority should certify that the preconditions of 4.4 have been met before
initiating the review process.
If there are known deviations from these preconditions, the project decision authority may still decide
to initiate the review. This should only be done if such a decision is consistent with the overall project
plan and with any contractual agreements that exist.
If the decision to proceed is made in the presence of deviations, these deviations shall be incorporated
in a published modification to the review policy or the milestone criteria, as appropriate.
5 Review process
5.1 Overview of required review functions
Figure 3 shows the relationships between the functions at the second level of the hierarchy shown in
Figure 1. It also shows the relationships between these secondlevel functions and the preconditions
shown in the context diagram, Figure 2.
6
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 11 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
The required review functions are detailed in 5.2 to 5.5.
NOTE In this clause, the requirements specify that specific persons or groups of persons are responsible for
carrying out the functions. The particular responsibilities are chosen with a view to preserving the independence
of the review results, while at the same time encouraging teamwork between the reviewers and the project
personnel.
Figure 3 — Subfunctions of “Evaluate project status”
5.2 Initiate review process
5.2.1 Overview
Figure 4 shows the relationships between the required review functions for initiating a project review.
Elements of both the milestone criteria and the project review policy can participate in the control of
each of these required review functions. Therefore, these controls are shown as merged at the top of
Figure 4.
The purpose of this group of functions is to put in place the controls and mechanisms necessary for the
remainder of the review process.
7
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 12 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
Figure 4 — Initiate review process
5.2.2 Select review board chairperson
The project decision authority shall appoint a review board chairperson from the field of available
independent experts, guided by the technical demands of the specific milestone criteria and by the
project review policy.
5.2.3 Select review board members
The review board chairperson shall select review board members with the concurrence of the project
decision authority, guided by the technical demands of the milestone criteria and by the project review
policy.
5.2.4 Select project review team
The project decision authority shall select a project review team, guided by the technical demands of
the milestone criteria and by the project review policy.
5.2.5 Establish review plan
The review board chairperson shall establish a review plan with the participation and consent of the
review board members, the project decision authority and the project review team.
8
© ISO 2023 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 13 ----------------------
ISO/FDIS 21349:2023(E)
The participants should consider the following factors in preparing the plan:
a) scheduling of publication and availability of evidence;
b) meeting format and schedule;
c) particular goals of each meeting;
d) means of recording the proceedings of the review and communications;
e) medium, format and style of publication.
5.3 Prepare and publish evidence
5.3.1 Overview
Figure 5 shows the functions required for preparation and publication of evidence. The purpose of
these functions is to provide detailed technical evidence that the project milestone has been reached.
The term “publication” is used here with a broad interpretation.
The type of evidence depends on the technologies involved and the phase of the project. The evidence
should contain information about the methods used to reach c
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.