实施技术同行评审程序:原则、政策和文化变革

Francisco Alvarez, Leslie Britt, Jon Trujillo
{"title":"实施技术同行评审程序:原则、政策和文化变革","authors":"Francisco Alvarez,&nbsp;Leslie Britt,&nbsp;Jon Trujillo","doi":"10.1002/iis2.13266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The complex scientific and engineering work performed at Sandia National Laboratories is supported by a comprehensive system of reviews that include design, gate, and peer reviews. A recent exercise revealed a need to change how technical peer reviews are conducted. Building on industry standards, best practices, current standard internal practices and other previous work, Sandia has developed a continuous improvement process to institutionalize technical peer review in the design lifecycle of products. The approach focuses on translating customer and leadership expectations, utilizing current established practices, simplifying planning and execution, and providing resources to project teams to guide them and ensure that rigorous and consistent technical peer reviews are performed. This paper presents the process used by Sandia to improve the technical peer review process, the factors that affect implementation of a peer review process, the simplified three-step process implemented, the tools and resources generated, and the sustainment plan adopted to increase the institution-wide use of peer review as a tool to improve product delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":100663,"journal":{"name":"INCOSE International Symposium","volume":"34 1","pages":"2225-2235"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementation of a Technical Peer Review Process: Principles, Policy, and Cultural Change\",\"authors\":\"Francisco Alvarez,&nbsp;Leslie Britt,&nbsp;Jon Trujillo\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/iis2.13266\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The complex scientific and engineering work performed at Sandia National Laboratories is supported by a comprehensive system of reviews that include design, gate, and peer reviews. A recent exercise revealed a need to change how technical peer reviews are conducted. Building on industry standards, best practices, current standard internal practices and other previous work, Sandia has developed a continuous improvement process to institutionalize technical peer review in the design lifecycle of products. The approach focuses on translating customer and leadership expectations, utilizing current established practices, simplifying planning and execution, and providing resources to project teams to guide them and ensure that rigorous and consistent technical peer reviews are performed. This paper presents the process used by Sandia to improve the technical peer review process, the factors that affect implementation of a peer review process, the simplified three-step process implemented, the tools and resources generated, and the sustainment plan adopted to increase the institution-wide use of peer review as a tool to improve product delivery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100663,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"INCOSE International Symposium\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"2225-2235\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"INCOSE International Symposium\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/iis2.13266\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INCOSE International Symposium","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/iis2.13266","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

桑迪亚国家实验室所开展的复杂科学和工程工作得到了全面审查系统的支持,其中包括设计审查、把关审查和同行审查。最近的一项工作表明,有必要改变技术同行评审的方式。在行业标准、最佳实践、现行标准内部实践和其他以往工作的基础上,桑迪亚制定了一个持续改进流程,将技术同行评审制度化地纳入产品的设计生命周期。该方法的重点是转化客户和领导层的期望,利用当前的既定实践,简化规划和执行,并为项目团队提供资源指导,确保执行严格一致的技术同行评审。本文介绍了桑迪亚用于改进技术同行评审流程的过程、影响同行评审流程实施的因素、实施的简化三步流程、生成的工具和资源,以及为在全机构范围内更多地使用同行评审作为改进产品交付的工具而采取的持续计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Implementation of a Technical Peer Review Process: Principles, Policy, and Cultural Change

The complex scientific and engineering work performed at Sandia National Laboratories is supported by a comprehensive system of reviews that include design, gate, and peer reviews. A recent exercise revealed a need to change how technical peer reviews are conducted. Building on industry standards, best practices, current standard internal practices and other previous work, Sandia has developed a continuous improvement process to institutionalize technical peer review in the design lifecycle of products. The approach focuses on translating customer and leadership expectations, utilizing current established practices, simplifying planning and execution, and providing resources to project teams to guide them and ensure that rigorous and consistent technical peer reviews are performed. This paper presents the process used by Sandia to improve the technical peer review process, the factors that affect implementation of a peer review process, the simplified three-step process implemented, the tools and resources generated, and the sustainment plan adopted to increase the institution-wide use of peer review as a tool to improve product delivery.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信