
One hundred rules for NASA project managers (1995) [pdf] - tablet
http://www.oliverlehmann.com/project-management-sources/Nasa-Hundred-Rules-for-Project-Managers.pdf
======
double0jimb0
Spent 5 years at one of NASA's prime subcontractors, positions ranging from
mechanical CAD jockey to assistant program director.

This "guide" was written by a gentleman in the last years of his 37 year
career. I saw many similar guides/reviews of programs that were way behind
sched and over budget. All written by retiring/recently retired upper
management, they'd come in under a budget provided by some government
oversight company or consulting group. They'd poke sticks into every group,
come up with their assessment, then drop it on the active program director's
desk. The program director would assign actions, the gov't oversight group
could check off the box that it participated in "program saving" guidance, and
3 months later everyone forgets/ignores the input.

I think this guide paints a clear picture of how inefficient and misguided
gov't run programs are for those that can stand to see it. The irony is so
strong in the title, it's verging on sad. It is hard to believe anything
ground breaking or efficient was ever created by following a "100 Rules"
guide.

~~~
gnarbarian
As a federal state and municipal contractor of ten years I can say from
experience the higher up in government you go the more exponentially wasteful
their policies are and meaningless the average task becomes.

For example I spent maddening weeks changing fonts back and forth and trying
to get the same number of records per page (as the original access version) in
a report 100,000 pages long that nobody will ever read, print, or analyze with
tools. (it was a PDF)

I am convinced they were taking sheets from the report I wrote and printing
them out on transparencies which were overlaid on the old report so they could
tell me to move things around one pixel at a time.

------
thearn4
I've been with the agency for 5 years. Rules 76 and 78 kind of made me laugh,
since projects and centers stab each other in the back all the time. But I
think similar dynamics exist in any sufficiently large organization. Mastery
of internal politics eventually becomes one of the most highly valued skills
you can have, if you stay on for the long haul.

~~~
otoburb
Do you actually have to follow these rules? Is this a kind of "best practice
guideline" that PMs only sorta follow? Or is this rulebook ever/sometimes used
as a procedural weapon between PMs battling for resources, budgets or
influence?

~~~
thearn4
These are largely a list of "best practices", yes. Influence and budgetary
conflicts between projects and centers can happen from the "shop floor" all
the way up to the capital building. NASA's is one of the most earmarked
budgets in the federal government, usually shaped by a few key congressmen
with centers in their districts. So a budgetary struggle usually ends in some
equilibrium between the deemed "core competencies" of a center pitching new
work, and the ability of their congressfolk to direct work or facility
construction in spite of technical considerations.

(I should probably say that despite the politics involved, I really like what
I do. Still the best job I've had by a long shot)

------
bengali3
Rule 96: "Experience may be fine, but testing is better. Knowing something
will work never takes the place of proving that it will."

my motto: "It's only as good as it has been tested to be"

I'm constantly reminded of this, most recently when I noticed my local Fire
Dept doing checks on their specialty (gas powered) chainsaw tool every tuesday
around 7:45am as I drive by on my commute.

~~~
mcguire
Speaking as someone who has worked for NASA and is familiar with "testing",
that rule makes me a little queasy.

~~~
differentView
Can you explain?

~~~
mcguire
Admittedly, I don't work on flight or science related things, but testing here
means taking relatively cursory look at things so that you can check off items
on a list. It's extremely happy-path focused.

------
clutchski
"Most international meetings are held in English. This is a foreign language
to most participants such as Americans, Germans, Italians, etc."

Zing.

~~~
thathonkey
I couldn't tell if that was intended to be a slight against the avg.
American's tenuous grasp on English, or if they literally meant people from
the Americas which may include Central and South America.

~~~
dunmalg
Probably literally meant people from the US. In English, standard usage
assumes "America" to mean "USA", and references to the region are referred to
as "the Americas" (plural), with the north/central/south regions being
considered largely separate. There's very little value in referencing the
majority of the residents of the western hemisphere as "Americans", as there's
really nothing they have in common beyond that.

------
mcguire
As the aeronautical engineer friend of mine says when you ask him why he's
writing web UI's rather than building rockets, which is what he trained to do:
"Because this flies and that doesn't."

------
ColinCochrane
Rule 30: "It is mainly the incompetent that don't like to show off their
work."

~~~
enord
Rule (-30): "Good work speaks for itself."

------
mturmon
Number 56: "The first sign of trouble comes from the schedule or the cost
curve. Engineers are the last to know they are in trouble."

------
numlocked
"External reviews are scheduled at the worst possible time, therefore, keep an
up-to-date set of business and technical data so that you can rapidly respond.
Not having up-to-date data should be cause for dismissal."

If you read 'external reviews' as 'fundraising rounds'...then no disagreement
there.

------
dredmorbius
People reading this strictly as an indictment of government work are utterly
missing the point. My own career spans decades, large companies and small, old
and new, and a few stints of government work as well.

The thing this reminds me most of all is a _very_ time-worn copy of Arthur
Bloch's _Murphy 's Law: and other reasons things go ƃuoɹʍ_. You can find most
them here:
[http://www.murphyslaws.net/edition.htm](http://www.murphyslaws.net/edition.htm)

It was at a highway rest stop on one of the long Interstate routes favored by
aerospace engineers in the late 1970s, and I still think I've learned more
practical knowledge from it than just about any other book I've ever read,
though realizing the import of some of the apparently humorous laws (many of
which were actually said with all seriousness in their original expression)
has taken a long time to register.

Rule 24 from the Nasa piece should register with many here:

 _One must pay close attention to workaholics - if they get going in the wrong
direction, they can do a lot of damage in a short time. It is possible to
overload them and cause premature burnout but hard to determine if the load is
too much, since much of it is self generated. It is important to make sure
such people take enough time off and that the workload does not exceed 1 1 /4
to 1 1/2 times what is normal._

Another huge lesson, particularly for the younger people on HN, is that if you
find yourself working at an organization in which the rules here are being
consistently violated, _you are working at a sick organization and /or have a
grossly incompetent manager_.

I've had management all over the map. One of the best had a great deal of
government (and military) experience. He wasn't overtly technical (though he
knew more than he let on), but saw when goals were and weren't being met, and
would ensure that resources were made available and barriers removed, often
without asking. Two specific instances come to mind: I required additional
systems permissions for a specific task, told him, he was on the phone to the
responsible person and I had the privileges within ten minutes (I've worked at
shops where this is a 24-48 hour, or longer, task). Where my workflow made
heavy use of multiple terminals and screenspace, and secondary large monitors
were a rarity, when one freed up it was on my desk the next day without my
asking for it.

And when business conditions went south (there were a _lot_ of people hit),
our parting conversation was direct, to the point, and personal. What I _didn
't_ have to deal with was weeks or months of anxiety leading up to that point.

The gig following that one, with a young manager in start-up space, was a
polar opposite, and, at least from a management perspective, a strongly
negative contrast (though not the worst I've had).

------
pyrocat
Just reminds me of this
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvnr52Muwo8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvnr52Muwo8)

------
samiryusf
Coming with background in service company in oil field and I should say I
benefited from reading this script a lot

------
fuddle
"Space is not a big playing field." \- had me fooled.

~~~
dredmorbius
As an industry, it's not. Most industries aren't.

Nor are many online discussion sites, as a bonus ProTip.

