Zhu - User Research
Sharone - User Research
Michele - Project Manager
Ryan - Developer
Faith - Developer
Team
9 months - Ongoing
Timeline
Spaceport Integration Office (SIO)
SMT Client
NASA, Northrop, Orbital ATK, Space X, Blue Origin, Relativity, Firefly, VSFB, USSF-DBA, KSC, ULA, USN, Astra
Cape Support SIO Partners
Project Overview
Focus on improving the ground transportation scheduling process at Cape Canaveral
The increasing volume of launches at Cape Canaveral has raised concerns about the scalability of the current ground transportation scheduling system. Inefficiencies such as outdated tools, inconsistent communication among stakeholders, and siloed workflows have been identified. With launch frequencies expected to rise, these challenges risk causing significant disruptions and delays.
If the Spaceport Integration Office (SIO) is tasked with managing critical ground operations, why is its scheduling process still reliant on outdated, manual tools?
Challenge
The Spaceport Integration Office (SIO) currently manages ground cargo scheduling using manual tools like MS Word, Excel, and email. This approach is inefficient, prone to conflicts, and adds significant administrative burden. As launch volumes are projected to rise, these inefficiencies risk disrupting critical ground operations.
Manual scheduling processes are time-consuming.
Lack of visibility for LSPs results in unnecessary submissions and scheduling conflicts.
Outdated tools fail to support the scalability needed to manage an increasing launch cadence.
Insight Synthesis
To have a holistic understanding of this problem space, I conducted primary research and secondary research. I then synthesized the valuable insights into three different themes:
Inconsistent Processes
The lack of standardized request forms causes errors, delays, and increased workload for SIO and LSPs.
Limited Visibility
Manual tools cause conflict resolution and prevent LSPs from tracking request statuses, leading to redundant submissions.
Data Gaps
Absence of real-time driver inputs restricts SIO’s ability to monitor road usage and optimize scheduling.
Discovery Insights
Our discovery process explored two potential solutions to improve the ground transportation scheduling system: MS Forms and Smartsheets. Both options offered unique benefits, but key differences in feature sets, security compliance, and ease of integration shaped the decision-making process.
Smartsheets
Government version is conditionally approved but has limited features compared to the commercial version.
Commercial version offers greater functionality but requires approval for managing CUI data.
Potential delays in implementation due to additional approval processes.
Accessibility and permissions would need to be tightly controlled to meet security requirements.
MS Forms
Introduced external sharing in July 2023, enabling non-government entities to submit requests securely via commercial internet platforms.
Eliminates the need for CACs or clearances, streamlining communication with external parties.
Already approved for government use, with data housed securely in NIPR.
Lower risk profile and alignment with government cybersecurity standards.
How might we optimize ground operations to support the growing launch cadence while fostering better coordination and efficiency across all stakeholders?
Design Process
Why Microsoft Forms
We selected Microsoft Forms as the preferred tool due to its accessibility, cost-effectiveness, and alignment with government requirements. As a prebuilt, readily available solution, it eliminates the need for time-consuming and expensive custom development. Its low-code nature ensures ease of use while avoiding gatekeeping challenges often encountered in deploying new technologies within government operations.
Wireframes
The journey from concept to completion is anchored in an iterative process. Beginning with low-fidelity mockups, I explore a spectrum of design possibilities, then I moved to the medium-fidelity versions of it
Transcribe & Repeat
The LSPs often bypassed the Cape Support Request Form and submitted information via email instead of the provided PDF.
This forced Cape Support to manually transcribe the details into the PDF, a process that typically took 20 minutes per request. If an LSP needed to reschedule, the entire process had to be repeated.
Automate & Simplify
To ensure sensitive information remains protected, we leveraged MS Automate to streamline data formatting for LSPs. This approach eliminates manual tasks by automatically assigning customer/work order numbers, generating Julian Calendar dates, and assigning Maximo numbers.
Microsoft Integration
The integration of Microsoft tools replaces MS Word document forms with a standardized digital form for all LSP ground transport requests. LSPs can easily submit reschedule or cancel requests, which are enhanced with auto-generated reference numbers for tracking.
This integration eliminates the need for phone calls by auto-updating request cards and alerting Cape Support in real time.
Kanban Views
The Kanban chart was selected for its user-friendly interface, enabling Cape Support to track and manage multiple launches simultaneously. Key features include PowerBI Integration, CSV Export, Comprehensive Visibility, Team Collaboration, Customizable Views, Real-time Driver Reporting
Site Map
After understanding the features required for the wireframes, I mapped out the workflow and the MVP flow
Cape Support Workflow
The original workflow involved multiple simultaneous factors and decisions, creating constant back-and-forth communication. This inefficiency led to significant bottlenecks, delaying Cape Support’s ability to meet the LSPs' need for timely launches.
MVP Workflow
The redesigned process introduces full transparency and mutual awareness for both Cape Support and LSPs, enabling informed decision-making. This streamlined workflow reduces delays, saving time, money, and resources while improving mission efficiency.
