dc.contributor.advisor |
Cooper, Lynne P. |
en_US |
dc.contributor.author |
Bellisario, Sebastian Nickolai |
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2013-07-08T14:54:01Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2013-07-08T14:54:01Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2012-08 |
|
dc.identifier.citation |
JPL Summer Intern Program, Pasadena, California, August 2012 |
en_US |
dc.identifier.clearanceno |
12-4376 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/2014/43322 |
|
dc.description.abstract |
Through my work in the project proposal office I became interested in how technology advancement efforts affect competitive mission proposals. Technology development allows for new instruments and functionality. However, including technology advancement in a mission proposal often increases perceived risk. Risk mitigation has a major impact on the overall evaluation of the proposal and whether the mission is selected. In order to evaluate the different approaches proposals took I compared the proposals claims of heritage and technology advancement to the sponsor feedback provided in the NASA debriefs. I examined a set of Discovery 2010 Mission proposals to draw patterns in how they were evaluated and come up with a set of recommendations for future mission proposals in how they should approach technology advancement to reduce the perceived risk. |
en_US |
dc.description.sponsorship |
NASA/JPL |
en_US |
dc.language.iso |
en_US |
en_US |
dc.publisher |
Pasadena, CA : Jet Propulsion Laboratory, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2012. |
en_US |
dc.subject |
proposals |
en_US |
dc.subject |
technology development |
en_US |
dc.subject |
heritage |
en_US |
dc.title |
Managing the perception of advanced technology risks in mission proposals. |
en_US |
dc.type |
Student Report |
en_US |
dc.subject.NASATaxonomy |
Quality Assurance and Reliability |
en_US |