Introduction
Project management applies techniques, knowledge, skills and expertise as well as experience to a strategic activity in an organization as shown by Bolles and Hubbard (2007). Notably, a project is a unique venture in an organization undertaken to meet its goals such as new products, venturing into new markets or cutting the product costs. Expected, in the new and unique projects, the experience is insufficient or lacking for a disciplined implementation. In other cases, the project takes up a lot of resources and staff due to its size. As such, to meet the scope and requirement while meeting the project goal, management need to integrate effective communication channels, use adequate plans as well as make realistic and sufficient budgets.
Studies have shown that most of the set projects in an organization fail to meet the expected demands or exceed the time frame and the budget because of poor preparedness. Particularly, poor planning is a common challenge in new and unique projects. It causes the project to delay and consume more resources than planned. Likewise, poor documentation of the progress and expected success may lead to project failure. Additionally, inaccurate cost estimations and unforeseen cost drivers due to poor field analysis lead to high failures in most projects. This is the case where the budgets are inadequate, and the projects are over ambitious. Finally, the projects derail and succumb to failure if the communication channels are poor. Particularly, there is a need to align the goals of the project with the leadership objectives as well as internal and external expectations. Ultimately, the projects achieve faster and robust cross-sectional decision-making. As such, the study will analyze the scope, requirement, cost, time and quality of the project that failed in the past to determine the components and effects of poor project management.
Space shuttle
This was a spacecraft that was partly reusable attempt orbiting the Earth and run by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) as highlighted by Anderson (2002). The project, commonly known as Space Transportation System, the mandate was to produce reusable spacecraft with the aim of cutting the sunk costs in the long-term in 1969. In 1981, the project launched its first four tests flights that led to commencing of flights in 1982. Between the years 1981-2011, the program had undertaken a total of 135 missions. Notably, these missions helped in launching satellites and Hubble Space Telescope (HST) that enabled scientists to conduct diverse and ground-breaking orbital experiments as explained by National Research Council (U.S.) (2005). Additionally, there was construction and servicing of the international space station in the year 2011. However, in 1986 and 2003 the space shuttle exploded killing all members on board, seven in each case. In July 2011, NASA ended the space program and since then U.S. relied on the Russian rockets to explore the space. However, in 2014, NASA gave approval to SpaceX about taking the Americans to space. As such, the ensuing discussion investigates the causes of the close of the NASA Space Mission Program.
Requirements (SCOPE) failure
The project aimed at taking people to space while reusing the shuttle in future space expeditions. Additionally, the aims after landing on the moon were to take men to Mars. Here, the program embarked on a proposal to cover this ambitious scope through the integration of several steps. In the first step was to build shuttles and space station capable of handling these endeavors. Later, there will be the use of the stations for liftoff and return for the vehicles from Mars. In the last stretch, there would be manned missions to Mars. However, the Mars exploration has not been achieved due to failure in the project scope. Particularly, the proposal to explore Mars was too expensive at the time and thus only part of the project got the approval. This led to the commissioning of on building the shuttle and not the station. Failure to meet the scope of the initial proposal result in the closure of the NASA Space Program since after many years it did not meet the intended goal, to take people to Mars as shown by Aguirre (2013). Additionally, President Nixon cut the budget allocated to the NASA programs since it took a significant part of the national budget. This would have caused adverse effects on the economic development in the U.S. Indeed, lack of political will over the four decades after the landing people on moon limited the scope of the NASA projects since it requires financial ability to build the station and space vehicle.
Cost limitations of the NASA Space Program
The project did not meet the costs limit set by the program commission. Indeed, the costs increased on continued basis until it was unviable for the country. As such, the program set out plans to cut the manufacturing and operation cost but still it did not succeed, and it was overly higher in comparison to the expendable launchers. In fact, in the year 2011, the records show that the incremental cost for every Space Shuttle amounted to $450 million, measured as $ 18,000 per kilogram to low Earth orbit. On the other hand, the Russian Proton expendable, despite being based on the 1965 design, operates at a cost of $110 million, equal to $ 5,000 million per kilogram to low Earth orbit. After factoring in the costs of design, maintenance expenses and inflation adjustments the final costs totals to $1.5 billion, equal to$60,000 per kilogram for every launch undertaken. This led to cost being twice the amount expected during the launching of the project. Moreover, the space vehicles aimed at being reusable hence lowering the costs incurred in building them. The intended aim was not met, and the project became too expensive for the country since it drained taxpayers money from the system. Additionally, the designs and the material used in building the space shuttle became obsolete within a short span compared to the expected 100 years of usability. These expenses led to the financial burden that led to the termination of NASA program due the recurring costs with each launch. Thus, the program became unsustainable since it took a large part of the money meant for the development projects in the country, which would have led to sabotage of the economic growth in the long-run.
Limitations on the performance specifications (QUALITY) of NASA Space Program
The aspect of quality in NASA Space Shuttle program attracted criticism on two accounts, both the explosion and the low-Earth orbit. In the case of explosion, the Challenger exploded shortly after the vehicle lifted off leading to losing of seven crew members as well as the destruction of the shuttle as observed by Shayler (2000). Indeed, it exploded after one minute and 13 seconds lift off. The accident occurred because of the technical failure, and inclement weather experienced then. Bearing in mind that this was the 25th mission leads to a lot of questions about the technical aspect of the problem. For instance, despite that management got earlier information on the O-ring erosion based on the past flights, it was not supportive to the task force mandated with the redesigning responsibilities. Indeed, the ring led to an explosion of the space shuttle due to the low temperatures experienced. Clearly, the quality of the management skill in NASA did not respond to the project need leading to poor designs of the vehicle parts.
Secondly, there were concerns raised considering that the shuttle seemed trapped in the low-Earth orbit. This masked possible exploration missions that were more ambitious and progressive. There had been prospects of landing people on Mars, but NASA did microscopic to realize this goal after landing people on the moon in 1969. As such, the money invested in the program for the four decades did not have tangible results since the shuttle kept on orbiting just hundreds of miles above the Earth's surface. Moreover, that the shuttle did not meet the re-usability goals of the projects increases the cost or running the program since it withdrew a lot of money from the country. Had the program build reusable shuttles that are of high quality during its operating years, the low costs would have eased on taxpayers' money and the program would still be working.
Time constraint on the NASA Space Program
The Challenger faced a delay in during its launch due to two reasons. In the first case, the delay came about due to the bad weather expected in the station area. It would cause rain and cold temperatures that would disrupt the launch. Additionally, the then Vice President attendance to the launch was part of the program, as such, the NASA official made early adjustments to accommodate the Vice President schedule since his goodwill was important in securing the political willingness in allocating funds to the project. Although the launch window cleared later due to good weather, the launch was still postponed.
In the second case, delay emanated from the defective micro switch in the shuttle vehicle that led to the locking mechanism. As such, removing the handle caused more delays. On settling the locking problem, the winds became too strong to launch the space shuttle. Still, the temperature was too low in Florida and the launch experienced, even more, delays. Though some aspect of the delay was due to natural causes, human failure such as locking door and accommodation of the Vice President in the NASA launch program played a significant role in delaying the project.
Conclusion and recommendation
The case study of NASA Space Shuttle mission illustrates the effects of scope, quality, cost and requirement aspects of a project. Indeed, the cases show that in the case the scope of the sub-projects are incomplete due to the insufficient finances the project is apt to fail. This was the case with the NASA Mars project. Additionally, failure to estimate costs and incremental drivers will lead to project failure since the available budget cannot support the project completion. Still, quality of the inputs, as well as the final product, is essential to the life of the project. As such, poor quality shortens the life of a project while delays portray a negative reputation of the products. For instance, the door locking problem in the space shuttle is indicative of unpreparedness.
Based on the conclusions drawn in this study, it is important to adopt new recommendations to make sure that future projects are more successful. Firstly, the management should review the feedback of its tasks forces to cut the preventable risks in the project. Still, firms should benchmark on other related organization in the industry to avoid repetition of avoidable mistakes. Finally, projects that do not meet the set goals need earlier termination to cut sunk costs.
References
Anderson, C. V. (2002). National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA): Background, issues, bibliography. Hauppauge, N.Y: Nova Science.
Aguirre, M. A. (2013). Introduction to space systems: Design and synthesis. New York, NY: Springer.
Bolles, D., & Hubbard, D. G. (2007). The power of enterprise-wide project management. New York: American Management Association.
National Research Council (U.S.). (2005). Annual report: 2004. Washington, D.C: National Academies Press.
Shayler, D. (2000). Disasters and accidents in manned spaceflight. London [u.a.: Springer [u.a..
