SIST EN 14093:2004
(Main)Space project management - Organization and conduct of reviews
Space project management - Organization and conduct of reviews
This European Standard provides means for identifying and structuring all of the activities and information required in a project review. It identifies the information outputs and followup activities necessary to complete the review process. It also provides a checklist of activities and information required for each of the major project reviews identified in the European space management standards.
This standard does not prescribe a particular review procedure or organizational structure to be applied, in order to respect the customer's own rules and regulations.
When viewed from the perspective of a specific project context, the requirements defined in this standard should be tailored to match the genuine requirements of a particular profile and circumstances of a project.
NOTE Tailoring is a process by which individual requirements of specifications, standards and related documents are evaluated and made applicable to a specific project by selection, and in some exceptional cases, modification of existing or addition of new requirements.
Raumfahrtprojektmanagement - Organisation und Durchführung von Reviews
Diese Norm liefert die Mittel zur Bestimmung und Strukturierung der Informationen und Tätigkeiten, die bei einem Projektreview erforderlich sind. Sie legt die Ziele der Information und Tätigkeiten fest, die für die Durchführung des Reviews erforderlich sind. Weiterhin gibt sie in Form einer Checkliste die Informationen und Tätigkeiten an, die für die bei den ECSS-Normen zum Projektmanagement genannten wichtigen Reviews erforderlich sind.
Diese Norm schreibt kein bestimmtes Verfahren für die Durchführung von Reviews oder die entsprechende Organisationsstruktur vor, soweit die internen Richtlinien und Vorschriften des Kunden betroffen sind.
Unter projektspezifischen Gesichtspunkten sollten die in dieser Norm definierten Anforderungen angepasst werden, um dem jeweiligen Projektprofil und Projektumständen Rechnung zu tragen.
ANMERKUNG Anpassung ist ein Prozess, in dem einzelne Anforderungen oder Spezifikationen, Normen und ähnliche Dokumente nach Bewertung für ein bestimmtes Projekt ausgewählt werden. Die einzelnen Vertragsbedingungen können eine Streichung, Ergänzung oder Modifikation der Anforderungen dieser Norm erforderlich machen.
Management des projets spatiaux - Organisation et conduite de revues
La présente Norme européenne donne les moyens d'identifier et de structurer toutes les activités et informations indispensables aux revues de projet. Elle identifie les informations a produire et les activités de suivi nécessaires pour compléter le processus de revue. Elle fournit également une liste de vérification des activités et informations requises pour chacune des principales revues de projet identifiées dans les normes de management de l'ECSS.
La présente norme ne prescrit aucune procédure de revue ou structure organisationnelle particuliere afin de respecter les regles et réglementations propres au client.
Dans le contexte d'un projet donné, il convient d'adapter les exigences définies dans la présente norme pour qu'elles correspondent aux exigences initiales d'un profil particulier et des circonstances d'un projet.
NOTE L'adaptation est un processus par lequel des exigences individuelles relatives aux spécifications, normes et documents associés sont évaluées et rendues applicables a un projet spécifique par sélection et, dans des cas exceptionnels, par modification de l'existant ou ajout de nouvelles exigences.
Space project management - Organization and conduct of reviews
General Information
Relations
Standards Content (Sample)
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.Space project management - Organization and conduct of reviewsRaumfahrtprojektmanagement - Organisation und Durchführung von ReviewsManagement des projets spatiaux - Organisation et conduite de revuesSpace project management - Organization and conduct of reviews49.140Vesoljski sistemi in operacijeSpace systems and operationsICS:Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z:EN 14093:2002SIST EN 14093:2004en01-maj-2004SIST EN 14093:2004SLOVENSKI
STANDARD
SIST EN 14093:2004
EUROPEAN STANDARDNORME EUROPÉENNEEUROPÄISCHE NORMEN 14093February 2002ICS 49.140English versionSpace project management - Organization and conduct ofreviewsManagement des projets spatiaux - Organisation etconduite de revuesRaumfahrtprojektmanagement - Organisation undDurchführung von ReviewsThis European Standard was approved by CEN on 22 December 2001.CEN members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for giving this EuropeanStandard the status of a national standard without any alteration. Up-to-date lists and bibliographical references concerning such nationalstandards may be obtained on application to the Management Centre or to any CEN member.This European Standard exists in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language made by translationunder the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the Management Centre has the same status as the officialversions.CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom.EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATIONCOMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATIONEUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNGManagement Centre: rue de Stassart, 36
B-1050 Brussels© 2002 CENAll rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reservedworldwide for CEN national Members.Ref. No. EN 14093:2002 ESIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)2ContentspageForeword.4Introduction.41Scope.52Normative references.53Terms, definitions and abbreviated terms.53.1Terms and definitions.53.2Abbreviated terms.54Fundamentals of review.64.1Basic principles.64.2Stage of achievement and review definition.75Review process.125.1General.125.2Review bodies.125.3Roles and tasks.145.3.1Decision making authority.145.3.2Supplier project team.145.3.3Review group chairperson.145.3.4Review group members.155.3.5Review secretary.155.4Conditions for holding the review.155.5Review plan.155.6Review meetings.165.6.1Kickoff meeting.165.6.2Review group/supplier meetings.165.6.3Review group closing meeting.165.6.4Decision making authority meeting.16SIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)35.7Review Item Discrepancy recording and processing.176Review output and followup.186.1Final review group report.186.2Actions followup.19Annex A (informative)
Review tools.20A.1General.20A.2Template for review plan.20A.3Supporting documentation.21A.3.1General.21A.3.2Mission definition review.21A.3.3Preliminary requirements review.22A.3.4System requirements review.22A.3.5Preliminary design review.22A.3.6Critical design review.22A.3.7Qualification review.23A.3.8Acceptance review.23A.3.9Flight readiness review.23A.3.10Operational readiness review.24A.3.11Launch readiness review.24A.3.12Flight qualification review.24A.3.13End-of-life review.24A.4Review item discrepancy (RID).24 FiguresFigure 1 — Schematic presentation of interfaces and interactions between review participants.13Figure 2 — Logic diagram for RID processing.18 TablesTable 1 — Stage of achievement versus review reference - Progressive definition of requirements.9Table 2 — Stage of achievement versus review reference - Progressive verification.10Table 3 — Stage of achievement versus review reference - Progressive readiness and utilization.11SIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)4ForewordThis document EN 14093:2002 has been prepared by CMC.This European Standard shall be given the status of a national standard, either by publication of anidentical text or by endorsement, at the latest by August 2002, and conflicting national standards shallbe withdrawn at the latest by August 2002.It is based on a previous version1 originally prepared by the ECSS Working Group M-30-01, reviewed bythe ECSS Technical Panel and approved by the ECSS Steering Board. The European Cooperation forSpace Standardization (ECSS) is a cooperative effort of the European Space Agency, National SpaceAgencies and European industry associations for the purpose of developing and maintaining commonstandards.This Standard is one of the series of space standards intended to be applied together for themanagement, engineering and product assurance in space projects and applications.Requirements in this Standard are defined in terms of what shall be accomplished, rather than in termsof how to organize and perform the necessary work. This allows existing organizational structures andmethods to be applied where they are effective, and for the structures and methods to evolve asnecessary without rewriting the standards.The formulation of this standard takes into account the existing ISO 9000 family of standards.Annex A is informative.According to the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards organizations of thefollowing countries are bound to implement this European Standard: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic,Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands,Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.IntroductionProject reviews are examinations of the technical status of a project and associated issues at aparticular point in time. Their primary purpose is to provide a comprehensive assessment and, throughindependent participation, to give additional support to the project concerned at crucial stages and togive the responsible management confidence in the technical progress being achieved.The overall success of any review is dependent upon the planning, organization and specific assignmentof responsibilities prior to the review work and the process established to close out the action itemsraised during the review. An inadequately prepared or conducted review has little chance of success,and even a well organized review will accomplish little if questions raised are not answered to thecustomer’s satisfaction in a timely manner. Review members, not fully prepared for the review, will beneither effective nor productive. Thus, proper preparation of a review is essential for both the customerand supplier.This European Standard belongs to the Space project management series called up by the “Policy andprinciples” Standard, EN 13290-1.Reviews are carried out throughout the project life cycle, as shown in Figure 1 of EN 13290-4 at alllevels from system to equipment level.The review purpose, mandate and documentation vary for each particular project and for the specificphase or stage of activity of the project.
1 ECSS-M-30-01ASIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)51ScopeThis European Standard provides means for identifying and structuring all of the activities andinformation required in a project review. It identifies the information outputs and followup activitiesnecessary to complete the review process. It also provides a checklist of activities and informationrequired for each of the major project reviews identified in the European space managementstandards.This standard does not prescribe a particular review procedure or organizational structure to beapplied, in order to respect the customer’s own rules and regulations.When viewed from the perspective of a specific project context, the requirements defined in thisstandard should be tailored to match the genuine requirements of a particular profile andcircumstances of a project.NOTETailoring is a process by which individual requirements of specifications, standards and relateddocuments are evaluated and made applicable to a specific project by selection, and in some exceptional cases,modification of existing or addition of new requirements.2Normative referencesThis European Standard incorporates by dated or undated reference, provisions from otherpublications. These normative references are cited at the appropriate places in the text, and thepublications are listed hereafter. For dated references, subsequent amendments to or revisions of anyof these publications apply to this European Standard only when incorporated in it by amendment orrevision. For undated references the latest edition of the publication referred to applies (includingamendments).EN 13701, Space systems — Glossary of terms.EN 13290-4, Space project management — General requirements — Part 4: Project phasing andplanning.3Terms, definitions and abbreviated terms3.1Terms and definitionsFor the purposes of this European Standard, the terms and definitions given in EN 13701 and thefollowing apply.3.1.1mission requirements document (MRD)document defining mission parameters, overall system performance and system segment objectives3.1.2system requirements document (SRD)document defining system function, overall system performance, system segment objectives andinterfaces3.2Abbreviated termsThe following abbreviated terms are defined and used within this European Standard.AIVassembly integration and verificationARacceptance reviewSIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)6CDRcritical design reviewCIconfiguration itemCIDLconfiguration item data listD&Ddesign and developmentDRLdocument requirements listECSSEuropean Cooperation for Space StandardizationEOLRend-of-life reviewFQRflight qualification reviewFRRflight readiness reviewIFinterfaceILSintegrated logistic supportLRRlaunch readiness reviewMDRmission definition reviewMRDmission requirements documentN/Anot applicableORRoperational readiness reviewOTSofftheshelfPA/Sproduct assurance and safetyPDRpreliminary design reviewPRRpreliminary requirements reviewQRqualification reviewRIDreview item discrepancySRDsystem requirements documentSRRsystem requirements reviewSWCIsoftware configuration item4Fundamentals of review4.1Basic principlesThe basic principle applicable to reviews of all European space projects is that a thorough overallexamination of the technical status of the project is performed at crucial steps of the programme,involving independent expertise. Reviews assess the work performed by all participants in a projectagainst the stated project requirements, the application of the relevant requirements and standardsand good engineering practice.SIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)7It is essential that the status of all elements of a system under review and its interfaces (e.g. launcher,spacecraft, ground segment, payloads and operations) are examined during the review process.The objective of project review is to provide the customers management with assurance throughoutthe programme, that at the time of each specific review:—the feasibility of meeting the mission objectives has been established;—requirements are adequately defined so that by their fulfilment the mission objectives aresatisfied;—the design definition (including hardware, software, and operational approach) satisfiesspecified requirements for all parts of the system, including standardization where applicable;—all configuration items conform to their design, configuration and performance requirements;—verification of all specified requirements, from component to system level, has beendemonstrated;—no potentially serious risk has been overlooked which can affect safety, mission success orwhich can have major schedule or cost impact on the programme.A review constitutes a major milestone in the project and a major responsibility for management. Areview identifies potential problems at an early stage and, depending on the terms of reference of thereview group, results in decisions or recommendations to the project management on how to solvethose problems. In addition, the outcome of project reviews can serve to measure the suppliers’progress against prescribed requirements.4.2Stage of achievement and review definitionEach review should be planned to take place at a natural stage of work in progress and at times whensufficient information exists to start the next phase of work with confidence. The definition of this mayvary slightly, depending on the nature of the project involved.The principle adopted in EN 13290-4 is that activities may overlap project phases. Stricter definitionmay be adopted to formulate the required output for a specific phase. This is particularly true for theearly stages of a project, and should be contained in the relevant project requirements document.However, based on the system and product activities defined in clause 4 of EN 13290-4 and asfurther defined in clause 7, (determined by the principle “define down, make and verify up”), acorresponding review sequence has been derived in this Standard. For a review cycle, this meansthat:a)requirements and design definition are established, from the level of mission objectives down tothe lowest level of design;b)verification is performed from the lowest level configuration item up to mission readiness level.Requirements pertaining to the relationships between system level phases and reviews, as listed inclause 7 of EN 13290-4 are further detailed here in Tables 1, 2 and 3.Formal project reviews are held at system level and are necessary at lower levels (subsystem,equipment and software items). The number and type of reviews is dependent on the project size,complexity, engineering criticality and whether it is a recurring product. Subsystem and equipmentcritical design and acceptance reviews are completed before the system level review is initiated.System level reviews should involve the customer and the first level supplier. Lower level reviewsshould involve the first level supplier and his suppliers (and so on). The customer shall always havethe right to attend any lower level project review, including those below the level of its direct suppliers.SIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)8When exercising this latter right, the customer should act as an adviser who contributes based on thetechnical knowledge and experience of its representatives attending the review. In some cases,however, the customer may elect to maintain a formal direct involvement in specific lower levelreviews to minimize technical or programmatic risk. Such cases shall be clearly identified in thebusiness agreement, including role and prerogative of the customer during those reviews (i.e. reviewgroup cochairmanship).Using the typical project life cycle of EN 13290-4, the following reviews, designated in this standard,are considered:—system requirements review;—preliminary design reviews;—critical design reviews;—qualification reviews;—acceptance reviews.These important reviews are those usually carried out at any product level.SIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)9Table 1 — Stage of achievement versus review reference - Progressive definition of requirementsStage of activity justcompletedReview
name(system level)Output for the systemOutput forsubsystemsOutput forequipmentIdentification of userrequirements and initialconcepts.Mission definitionreviewMDRaConfirmation of the mission requirements.N/AN/AInitial mission or userrequirementsconverted into overallsystem requirements,i.e. mission feasibilityand validation ofsystem architecture.Preliminaryrequirements reviewPRRbConfirmation of system feasibility and functional specificationreleased.Requirements on system interfaces established by the firstlevel customer.Allocation ofsubsystem functionalrequirements.N/ASystem technicalspecificationestablished.System requirementsreviewSRRcAssessment of preliminary performance based on conformancewith system functional requirements. Evaluation of major plans,(such as D&D, AIV, PA/S). Controlled configuration. Systemtechnical specification released, with inclusion of externalinterfaces.Allocation of technicalrequirements on eachsubsystem.Identification oftechnicalrequirements forcritical technologies.Preliminary designestablished.Preliminary designreviewPDRAssessment of performance based on analysis results,establishment of technological readiness and compatibilitybetween design and customer requirements, approval ofproject plans (such as qualification plan, verification and testplan) and standards. Compatibility between design andcustomer requirements, confirmation of verification approach,special models design. Internal interfaces established.Controlledconfiguration. Test andverification methodsdefined. Release oftechnical subsystemspecifications.Allocation oftechnicalrequirements oneach equipment.Test and verificationmethods defined.aGenerally an internal consumer/customer review.bGenerally internal customer review to confirm feasibility.cThe system level SRR should be the baseline from which the first level supplier conducts his subsystem SRRs.SIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)10Table 2 — Stage of achievement versus review reference - Progressive verificationStage of activity justcompletedReview name(system level)Output for the systemOutput for subsystems and equipmentDevelopment testingcompleted.Supplier detaileddesign established.Critical design reviewCDRaDesign justification file: e.g. integration and test of functionalmodel, design analyses and preliminary version of usersdocumentation.“Buildto”, “buyto” documents and testprocedures.Integrate and test aqualification model.For ground elementstechnical qualificationof, e.g. control centreand user’s groundelement.Qualification reviewQRbGround qualification of the system by the customer.Test results and analyses.Design justification (analysis and inspection reports) andqualification reports.User’s documentation.Qualification of ground elements.Product configuration baseline by configuration item data list(CIDL) release.Completion of design verification activities(test, analyses and inspections).Product configuration baseline by CIDLrelease.Integrate and test afirst flight model to theflight design qualified.Acceptance reviewARcFlight model system acceptance test results andanalyses/verification and certificate of acceptance.Completion of product verification activities(test, inspections).aTo achieve system CDR objectives, subsystem CDRs and ground segment/operations design reviews should have been completed.bGround segment implementation review should be carried out in this timeframe.cTo achieve AR objectives, subsystem ARs shall be completed.SIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)11Table 3 — Stage of achievement versus review reference - Progressive readiness and utilizationStage of activity justcompletedReview name(system level)Output for the systemOutput forsubsystemsOutput forequipmentOperational readinessestablished.Operational readinessreviewORRResults operational qualification and declaration of operationalreadiness.Correct team size andtraining, nominal anddegraded modes ofoperation exercised.N/ACompatibility andreadiness of spaceelement for flight.Flight readinessreviewFRRConfirm proper performance with mission requirements andinterfaces with all mission elements.“Asbuilt” configurationconfirmed.N/ALaunch preparationcomplete and missionperformance verified.Launch readinessreviewLRRConfirm proper closure of ORR and FRR actions. Declarationof launch readiness.N/AN/ATest and verification ofactual performanceversus missionrequirements afteruseful time of flightoperation or service.Flight qualificationreviewFQROperational qualification of system or inorbit checkoutcompleted and capability to fulfil intended mission confirmed.N/AN/AEnd of useful time ofoperation or service.End-of-life reviewEOLRCondition and procedures for disposal, retrieval, reentry.Lessons learned.Lessons learned.SIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)125Review process5.1GeneralA project review shall avail itself of strong, independent expertise that is impartial to the interests of boththe customer’s project team and the supplier. Accordingly, the customer shall ensure that thisindependent element is represented in a review group at senior expertise level to support the customer.Review groups shall have access to all the information necessary for them to carry out their tasks.The following elements shall be available to adequately meet the objective of a review:—timely definition of the data package;—data input related to the review objectives and timely delivery of a complete and agreed datapackage;—emphasis on reviewing working documents;—clear identification and allocation of tasks to the review group;—review group study of documents followed by the generation and disposition of review itemdiscrepancy (RIDs) (see subclause 5.7);—contractor summary presentation including answers to questions, early in the review process (e.g.5 working days after review of the data package);—consolidation by the review group of the input provided and recommendations to customer;—customer decision, when applicable;—project followup and confirmation of appropriate closure of actions.A benefit of the review can be a list of lessons learned.The following subclauses establish requirements for the preparation and conduct of the review andparticipant roles and responsibilities.5.2Review bodiesThe participants in a review shall include the decision-making authority, the supplier’s project team andthe review group as presented in the schematic diagram of Figure 1.The decision-making authority shall have the authoritative role. It may be organized in a Project SteeringCommittee or Programme Directorate or any other suitable entity. It shall be composed of managers oflevel high enough to have:—authority over the actors of the project;—the power to make all necessary decisions or the capacity to easily access people having thatpower.It shall be chaired by a representative of the customer organization and include at least the customerproject or programme manager. The decision-making authority should involve the management of thesupplier organization, in order to discuss and agree on all issues concerning the review. Such issues arethe scope of the review, the mandate of the review group, the review organization and planning, and inparticular, the review group recommendations ensuring corrective actions.SIST EN 14093:2004
EN 14093:2002 (E)13The supplier’s project team shall have the executive role. Some members of the supplier’s project teammay be selected to present the documentation submitted to review. All members (as well as thetechnical support to the project team) shall be available to provide information requested by the reviewgroup and to reply to the RIDs.The review group shall have the consultative role. It should include representatives of the customerorganization having no direct involvement in the project activities and always shall include engineeringand product assurance experts. Qualified representatives of external bodies having specificcompetencies necessary for the review may also be included, such as:—experts in the design or industrialization of the type of product (or similar) subject to review;—specialists responsible for running and maintaining similar products;—representatives of interfacing systems, components or projects.When feasible the review group should be composed around the same core members throughout theproject cycle.The review group chairperson shall be appointed by the decision making authority, and shall generallybe selected from the customer organization, but shall not be a member of the customer’s project teamand shall have no hierarchical authority over it. The chairperson shall have equal or higher seniority tothe customer project or programme manager, and during the review process functional authority overthe review group.—In some cases the review group may have a part of the authoritative role. In such a situation thecomposition of both the decision making authority and the review group shall be adjusted.—The customer’s project team shall not appear as a review body. However, during the reviewprocess its support to the review group and to some extent to the supplier’s project team is ofprimary importance for the success of the review.—The review group may establish panels, or subpanels, depending on the complexity of theproduct under review.Figure 1 — Schematic presentation of interfaces and interactions between review participantsDecision making authorityfrom the customer organisationAuthoritative roleAdvice, options andrecommendations (5)Decisions (6)through customer project teamSupplier project teamExecutive roleReview groupConsultative roleData package (2)to review group throughcustomer project teamReview request andterm
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.