Organizational Behavior The author of this report has been asked to review the case study that focuses on the NASA Odyssey Spec Analyzer. The project has been riddled with schedule slippage, cost overruns and low overall quality. However, a read of the case study reveals that there was also some major lessons learned and the people and organizations involved were able to adjust on the fly and eventually get things done despite the challenges that arise the very tight deadline that was in place. Indeed, no window to actually use the product would reveal itself or another seven years per the details of the case study. While it would have been better for the program and the people involved to have the lessons learned in advance, they got it right before all was said and done and they will have absorbed and pondered these lessons when the knowledge is needed again in the future.

Analysis

Problem

The overall problems present within this case study and the situation it covered are not hard to figure out. Indeed, the major issues were cost overruns, schedule overruns and quality not being what it should be. However, these are symptoms of what was really going on. What was really going on were contractors that were not working together as they should be, the wrong people being the focal point and power-brokers of getting things done and people being more worried about covering their tail and not getting demoted than getting it out there what was wrong when it was wrong.

Solution

As noted above, there were a few problems but the solutions were eventually figure out, even if they occurred a little later than they could or should have. At a high level, the solution to the problems had in this case study is more frequent, open and honest communication. The specific situations and issues should be addressed as follows:

The contractors and personnel that are used should be committed to doing the job right and on time. The case study makes mention of a NASA official having to pick up the phone so as to get a subcontractor to get moving. This worked as a good solution for this case study but the case study also notes that if a Beta expediter had done the same thing, the response would not have been as brisk and complete. This is not acceptable. If a firm is unable or unwilling to do as required including being on time, having the proper amount of quality and so forth, they should do the right thing and not bid on the project. Instead, a proper solution would be getting the proper buy-in from the right people at this contractor or going to a different contractor

Everyone involved should always act on a professional level. This is a...

Everyone in charge should get up and say that if problems are found, they should be reported. So long as people are diligent in their jobs and report things as they happen, there should be no fear of demotions, yelling or condemnation. The end goal is not to fire and castigate people but rather get things done. This cannot be done properly when people are focused on protecting themselves out of sheer fear. Indeed, the one instance where someone was fired as part of the case study came about because of good faith explanations of what was really going on. A series of these updates led to the revelation that one of the managers was not doing their job. Against, it was professional ... not personal.
The power-brokers in an organization should not always be determined by hierarchy and rank. Indeed, rank and leadership skills in general are good things to have for leaders but sometimes the best people to be in power are those that "get stuff done." This is a theme that is mentioned directly or indirectly throughout the case study. To be sure, these subject matter experts should absolutely be a voice, if not in a position of power, when it comes to projects like this. Leadership and project management skills are important but knowing the nuts and bolts of what is going on and being able to be an active participant in the same while being a leader is even better. This will not work in every situation but it certainly worked in this case study ... and more than once.

Actions

There are several actions that should be in place for this and future projects down the road. They are as follows:

The top subject matter experts that have skills and knowledge relating to a particular project should have a seat of power with such a project. Optimally, a person like this will be the project manager, such as was the case with the Odyssey project.

The people and managers of a project need to know that the reporting of problems and issues that come should be done without fear. So long as people are going about their job as instructed and so long as they are going by the book, they will have no fear of losing their job. What will get them into trouble is if they do deviate from the proper procedure and it will be even worse if they lie or obfuscate when it comes to the problems that arise.

When it comes to fettering out whether/when there are people problems relative to such projects, there should not be a witch hunt. Indeed, if symptoms…