1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Strategic Workforce Management Model
February, 2009
PAE/Howard Ross and PAE/Jason Derleth
Aerospace Corporation/Marcus Lobbia and John Goble
OHCM/Stephen Chesley
PAE/Nancy Searby and Andrew Demo
www.nasa.gov 1

2. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Order of Presentation
• Why do we need something like SWMM?
• How SWMM was built?
• So, how many people does NASA need over the next decade?
• How SWMM can be used to do “what if” scenarios?
• In the absence of other data, can we estimate workforce needs
using budget and schedule data?
• How should we forecast the effects of stretching a project or
cutting its budget?
www.nasa.gov 2

3. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Why do we need something like SWMM?
• No large organization, with a multitude of projects
and numerous physical locations, has perfect insight
into long-term workforce demand
– Without a carefully constructed set of data and a model,
• It is difficult to predict workforce needs except over the very
near term
• It is even more difficult to do vital ‘what if’ analyses
– This is the real focus of this presentation: to demonstrate we
are trying to develop a relatively rapid ‘what if’ forecasting
capability
www.nasa.gov 3

4. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Why do we need something like SWMM?
• Understanding future workforce Civil Service Opportunities Over Time
needs allows: 20000
15000 Wedge of Opportunity
- as new CS FTP
- as CS temp/term
– Strategic budget decisions 10000
- as contract-able work
5000
– Better-placed work assignments 0
2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020
Fiscal Year
– Targeted hiring
Agency Competency Distribution
Mission Operations
Quality/Safety/Performance
Technician
• Know your workforce (types and Structures, Materials & Mechanics
Electrical &Electronic
numbers) Demand Engineering of Systems
Sensor Systems
Computer Science & Information Technology 8%
6% 4%
4%
5%
Human & Biological
• Know your workforce Supply Thermal/Fluid
Power & Propulsion
4%
5%
Systems Analysis & Mission Planning 19%
• Identify gaps and surpluses Aeronautics
Multi-disciplinary R&D
Chemical
Earth Sciences 12%
Space Sciences
Biological Sciences 5% 4%
3%
• Present results and forecasts to Physical Sciences
Professional Development
Management
3% 1%
0% 0%
0% 0%
2% 1%
1%
1%
6%
Business Operations
decision-makers Workforce Operations & Support
Financial Operations 3%
2%
Institutional Operations & Support
SWMM is trying to forecast DEMAND far into the future.
www.nasa.gov 4

5. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Why do we need something like SWMM?
• From HR 2764 Appropriation Language:
– …”Finally, NASA is encouraged to engage in
long-term agency-wide workforce planning.”
– “The Administrator shall prepare a strategy for:
• minimizing job losses…
• equitably distribute tasks and workload between the
Centers….
• [provide] overall projections of future civil service
.. workforce levels”
SWMM is trying to forecast DEMAND far into the future.
www.nasa.gov 5

6. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Order of Presentation
• Why do we need something like SWMM?
• How SWMM was built?
• So, how many people does NASA need over the next decade?
• How SWMM can be used to do “what if” scenarios?
• In the absence of other data, can we estimate workforce needs
using budget and schedule data?
• How should we forecast the effects of stretching a project or
cutting its budget?
www.nasa.gov 6

7. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
How SWMM was built
Two ways it could be done:
Index Name Code P
2.4.1 Space Obse rv atories
1.4.1.6 T errest rial Planet F inder 269,590
1.4.3.2 Hubble Spac e T elesc ope Development 530,007
1.4.3.5 Hubble Spac e T elesc ope Operat ions 315,404
1.4.2.2 James W ebb Spac e T elesc ope 411,672
1.4.7.1
1.4.10.1
1.4.10.3
1.2.6.1
W ide- Field Infrared Survey Explorer
LISA(Laser Int erferomet er Spac e Ant enna)
Const ellat ion- X
Magnet ospheric Mult isc ale (MMS)
340,396
430,647
390,492
943,396
Bottom up: project-by-project Phase C/D Workforce and Development Cost (FY08$M)
1.2.7.2 Int erst ellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) 576,706 $2,000
1.4.5.1 Gamma- ray Large Spac e T elesc ope (GLAST 378,710
(>1000 discrete items in our budget
$ Dev FY08$M
1.4.6.1 Kepler 354,171
$1,800 Linear ($ Dev FY08$M) Cassini
1.4.7.5 AST RO- E II 344,833
1.4.8.5 FUSE 378,154
y = 0.4392x
1.4.8.9 GALEX 657,620 $1,600
1.4.8.10 W MAP 610,577 R2 = 0.9241
1.4.8.11 SIRT F/Spit zer 420,579
& workforce systems)
Development Cost FY08$M
$1,400
1.4.8.12 Chandra 397,424
1.4.8.15 Int egral 412,595
1.4.8.16 XMM 411,021 $1,200
1.2.1.2 Geospac e Sc ienc e 274,542
1.2.7.9 IBEX (10) 316,764
$1,000
1.2.7.10 NuSt ar (11) 328,689
1.4.1.1 Spac e Int erferomet er (SIM) - Planet Quest 453,341 Spitzer
1.4.1.7 Large Binoc ular T elesc ope Int erferomet er 481,847 $800
1.4.3.3 Hubble Spac e T elesc ope Servic ing Mission 217,774 MER
1.4.7.3 EUSO 919,203 MRO
$600
1.4.7.4 SW IFT 789,737
1.4.7.6
1.4.8.6
1.4.8.7
1.4.8.8
Nuc lear Spec t rosc opic T elesc ope Array
CHIPS
RXT E
SW AS
222,501
392,139
372,059
367,832
Top Down: parametric estimates $400
DawnNew Horizons
STEREO
Kepler Phoenix
Deep Impact
$200
1.4.8.13 HET E- II 425,082
(derived from cost estimates)
Stardust MESSENGER
1.4.8.14 GP- B 415,113 Genesis
1.4.8.17 IPAC 556,464 $-
1.4.9.3 Hersc hel 550,059 - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000
1.4.9.4 Planc k 429,559
Total Workforce
1.4.10.6 Fut ure Missions 381,269
2.5.2.2 Hubble Spac e T elesc ope Servic ing Projec t 329,678
SWMM is “bottom up” for most of the portfolio (allowing both
numbers and types of people, but “top down” for science projects
whose planned start is sometime after 2015
www.nasa.gov 7

8. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
How SWMM was built:
we have estimates of DEMAND for many projects
JWST Workforce Workflow Projections by Domain JWST Workforce Workflow: Engineering Competency Suites
225 160.0
Phase DEV
150.0
TNAR PDR CDR
200
140.0 2.12 Multi-disciplinary R&D
2.11 Thermal/Fluid
130.0 2.10 Structures, Materials & Mechanics
175 2.9 Sensor Systems
2.8 Power & Propulsion
120.0
2.7 Electrical & Electronic
2.6 Computer Science & Information Technology
150 Science 110.0
2.5 Chemical
Mission Operations 2.3 Aeronautics
100.0 2.2 Systems Analysis & Mission Planning
Leadership and Management 2.1 Engineering of Systems
125 90.0
Engineering
FTE
FTE
Business Management 80.0
100
70.0
60.0
75
50.0
50 40.0
Assumed 30.0
25
20.0
10.0
0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 0.0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
FY FY WIMS Data Mar 07
Engineers roll off throughout development; Distribution of specific engineering
science support stays constant; estimated competencies changes throughout
what happens after launch and modified our development.
estimates after discussions with SMD.
Example: JWST Workforce Plan (2007) – drawn from N2 and WIMS and discussions with Program Manager
www.nasa.gov 8

9. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
How SWMM was built…
• Then aggregate all projects at a center or across the agency to
get total workforce DEMAND.
Generate workforce demand for all
1
1 projects (like Orion and JWST), using N2, 2
2 Extract all needs for a 3
3 Create a “people” sand
WIMS, and assumptions from program competency for the
managers for outyears Agency or at a center chart that can be
displayed by Center, by
M ulti-d isc iplina ry R & D
Th e rm al/Flu id
competency, etc.
S tru cture s, M a teria ls &
M ec ha n ic s
S e n so r S ystem s
P o w e r & P ro p uls io n
E le ctrica l & E lec tro n ic
C om p u te r S cie nc e &
[D]
Info rm ation Te ch n olo gy
[S]
C he m ica l
H um a n a n d B io lo g ica l
A e ro na utics
S ys te m s A na lys is &
M is sio n P la n nin g
E n g in e erin g o f S ys te m s
05 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
J W S T W o rk fo rc e W o rk flo w : E n g in e e rin g C o m p e te n c y S u ite s
1 6 0 .0
Phase DEV
1 5 0 .0
TN A R PDR CDR
1 4 0 .0 2 . 1 2 M u lt i-d is c ip lin a ry R & D
2 . 1 1 T h e rm a l/ F lu id
1 3 0 .0 2 . 1 0 S t ru c t u re s , M a t e ria ls & M e c h a n ic s
2.9 S e ns o r S y s te m s
2 . 8 P o w e r & P ro p u ls io n
1 2 0 .0
2 . 7 E le c t ric a l & E le c t ro n ic
2 . 6 C o m p u t e r S c i e n c e & In fo r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y
1 1 0 .0
2 . 5 C h e m ic a l
2 . 3 A e ro n a u t ic s
1 0 0 .0 2 . 2 S y s t e m s A n a ly s is & M is s io n P la n n in g
2 . 1 E n g in e e rin g o f S y s t e m s
9 0 .0
FTE
8 0 .0
7 0 .0
6 0 .0
5 0 .0
4 0 .0
3 0 .0
2 0 .0
1 0 .0
0 .0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
FY W IM S D a ta M a r 0 7
www.nasa.gov 9

10. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Order of Presentation
• Why do we need something like SWMM?
• How SWMM was built?
• So, how many people does NASA need over the next decade?
• How SWMM can be used to do “what if” scenarios?
• In the absence of other data, can we estimate workforce needs
using budget and schedule data?
• How should we forecast the effects of stretching a project or
cutting its budget?
www.nasa.gov 10

11. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
How many employees do we need?
FTE by Center ARC
25000
DFRC
GRC
20000
GSFC
JPL
15000
JSC
KSC
10000
LaRC
MSFC
5000
SSC
HQ
0
ShrdSvcs
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Unassgnd
FTE by Domain
25000
20000
Science
15000 Mgt.
Msn. Ops.
10000 Engineer.
Business
5000
0
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Obvious question: why does the DEMAND drop? Is this real [no]? Answers will become obvious shortly…
www.nasa.gov 11

12. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
SOMD
FTE by Center ARC
4000
DFRC
3500 GRC
3000 GSFC
2500 JPL
JSC
2000
KSC
1500 LaRC
ASSUME: 1000 MSFC
500 SSC
•Shuttle 0
HQ
ShrdSvcs
retirement in
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Unassgnd
2010
FTE by Domain
4000
•ISS in 2016 3500
3000
•SCAN, LSP, 2500
Science
Mgt.
RPT continue 2000 Msn. Ops.
1500 Engineer.
1000 Business
500
0
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
www.nasa.gov 12

13. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
ARMD
FTE by Center ARC
1600
DFRC
1400 GRC
1200 GSFC
1000 JPL
JSC
ASSUME: 800
KSC
600 LaRC
400 MSFC
SSC
•ARMD FTE 200
HQ
0
are ShrdSvcs
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Unassgnd
constant
beyond 1600
FTE by Domain
2014 1400
1200 Science
1000 Mgt.
800 Msn. Ops.
600 Engineer.
400 Business
200
0
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
www.nasa.gov 13

14. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
OTHER
FTE and Budget ($M) by Center ARC
12000
DFRC
10000 GRC
GSFC
8000 JPL
JSC
6000
ASSUME: KSC
4000 LaRC
MSFC
• Education FTE are 2000 SSC
constant at the 2014 HQ
level 0
ShrdSvcs
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Unassgnd
• Reimbursable Business
FTE are constant at the 12000
FTE and Budget ($M) by Domain
2008 level
10000
Science
• CASP FTE are 8000
Mgt.
constant at the 2014 6000 Msn. Ops.
level Engineer.
4000
Business
2000
0
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
www.nasa.gov 14

15. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
ESMD – a year ago
FTE by Domain (Generated March '08)
6000
5000
4000
Science
Management
FTE
3000 Mission Ops
Engineering
Business
2000
1000
0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Increase in engineering as more of the Ares and Lunar hardware
DDTE kicks in.
www.nasa.gov 15

16. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
ESMD -- today
FTE by Domain (Generated March '08)
6000
5000
Far fewer total FTE
As with most 4000
Science in the outyears now
big, long-term Management
FTE
3000 Mission Ops
Engineering
(with the biggest
projects, one Business
reduction in
2000
forecasts more 1000
engineering).
FTE the closer 0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
one comes to FTE by Domain
an execution 6000
Why: This is an
year. 5000
Science
artifact of WAG data
received from Cx:
4000
Mgt. •Little Ares V DDTE
3000 Msn. Ops.
•Very little lunar
Engineer. surface sys.
2000
Business •No center-
1000 assignments re Altair
0
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Nonetheless, the trend of the data through 2014 is good, and can / was used for “what if” analysis
www.nasa.gov 16

17. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Order of Presentation
• Why do we need something like SWMM?
• How SWMM was built?
• So, how many people does NASA need over the next decade?
• How SWMM can be used to do “what if” scenarios?
• In the absence of other data, can we estimate workforce needs
using budget and schedule data?
• How should we forecast the effects of stretching a project or
cutting its budget?
www.nasa.gov 17

18. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
How SWMM can be used to do
“what if” scenarios?
• Strategic Workforce Management Model is also to enable:
– Analysis of “what-if?” scenarios
• What if this project started earlier or if it stretched out?
• What if this project was done inhouse?
• What if we this project was done by international partners?
www.nasa.gov 18

19. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
SWMM Scenario Builder
Types of Scenarios (for now)
• Add and delete projects
• Shift projects in time (delay start)
• Stretch projects (remain longer in formulation; remain longer in
development; etc)
• Extend projects (e.g., keep operations going at existing level)
• Change project make/buy
• Besides FTE data, show effects on budget
• Assign projects or project elements to different centers
www.nasa.gov 19

20. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
How SWMM is run by a user to do these scenarios
Include (1) or Spend more time
Exclude (0) a than originally
project planned in a phase
Delay or advance Extend a project
the start of the longer than
project originally planned
www.nasa.gov 20

21. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
A simple scenario re Human Space Flight
• Extend ISS to 2020
www.nasa.gov 21

22. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
SOMD Current and with ISS Extended to 2020
Total FTE by Competency Domain Total FTE by Competency Domain
4000 4000
3500 3500
3000 3000
2500 2500
2000 Science 2000 Science
Mgt. Mgt.
1500 Msn. Ops. 1500 Msn. Ops.
Engineer. Engineer.
Business Business
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
2009
2010
2012
2013
2015
2016
2018
2019
2009
2010
2012
2013
2015
2016
2018
2019
2011
2014
2017
2020
2011
2014
2017
2020
Current Plan ISS extended
www.nasa.gov 22

23. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
All of SOMD and ESMD – JSC, KSC, and MSFC
ISS Extended to 2020
JSC - FTE by Domain JSC - FTE by Domain
3000 3000
2500 2500
Science Science
2000 Mgt. 2000
Mgt.
1500 Msn. Ops. 1500 Msn. Ops.
Engineer. Engineer.
1000 1000
Business Business
500 500
0 0
2011
2012
2013
2019
2020
2009
2010
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2011
2012
2013
2019
2020
KSC - FTE by Domain
2009
2010
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
KSC - FTE by Domain
1600 1600
1400 1400
1200 Science 1200 Science
1000 Mgt. 1000 Mgt.
800 Msn. Ops. 800 Msn. Ops.
600 Engineer. Engineer.
600
400 Business 400 Business
200 200
0 0
MSFC FTE by Domain
2010
2013
2017
2020
2009
2011
2012
2014
2015
2016
2018
2019
MSFC FTE by Domain
2010
2013
2017
2020
2009
2011
2012
2014
2015
2016
2018
2019
2000
2000
1800
1800
1600
Science 1600
1400 Science
Mgt. 1400
1200 Mgt.
1200
1000 Msn. Ops.
1000 Msn. Ops.
800 Engineer. 800 Engineer.
600
Business 600
400 Business
200 400
200
0
0
2011
2014
2017
2020
2009
2010
2012
2013
2015
2016
2018
2019
2011
2014
2017
2020
2009
2010
2012
2013
2015
2016
2018
2019
Base Case ISS Extended
www.nasa.gov 23

24. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Results of Some Other
Human Space Flight Scenarios
• We ran these 3 scenarios:
– Baseline
– Stretch 3 projects
• Shuttle flies to 2012 Scenario 1
• Orion stretched / grown by a year
Scenario 2
• Ares 1 stretched / grown by a year
– Shift 2 projects 2 years to the right
• Delay start of Altair
Scenario 3
• Delay start of Ares 5
www.nasa.gov 24

25. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Human Spaceflight Scenarios
• How to implement the scenarios:
– Extend Shuttle 2 years
• Assume 2009 staffing is duplicated in 2010 and 2011
– Stretch Orion and Ares I for 1 year
• Will show algorithm used for any project (not specific to these
projects) later in presentation
– Delay Ares V and Altair staffing up by 2 years
• Slide future years’ staffing 2 years to the right
www.nasa.gov 25