Strengthening the Jörg Feustel-Büechl, Harald …Management ESA has undertaken the Inter-Directorate Reform of Corporate and Risk Management to strengthen the Agency’s internal

Management

E SA has undertaken the Inter-DirectorateReform of Corporate and Risk Managementto strengthen the Agency’s internal

operations. The reform was completed at theend of 2006, encompassing five dedicatedprojects on Risk Management, Agency-WideControlling System, Project Plan and IntegratedProject Review, General Budget Structure andCharging Policy, and Corporate InformationSystems. It has contributed to improvedmanagement of the Agency’s internal opera-tions by engaging all internal stakeholders in acommon objective, introducing improvements toplanning and management methods, elaboratingconsolidated information structures and tools,contributing to enhanced transparency andaccountability, and by providing qualified newpolicies, processes and tools.

Why Do We Need to Change?All organisations, whatever theiractivities, markets, products or services,must adapt to a rapidly changingenvironment in order to maintain theirability to operate and competesuccessfully.

By any standards, ESA is ratedworldwide as a success. Its challengingenvironment requires that it must

Jörg Feustel-Büechl, Harald Arend, Eric Derio,Giovanni Infante, Gerhard Kreiner, Jesse Phaler& Michael TabbertInter-Directorate Reform Team, Paris, France;Frascati, Italy; Noordwijk, The Netherlands;Darmstadt, Germany

esa bulletin 129 - february 2007 55

Strengthening theManagement of ESAStrengthening theManagement of ESA

The Inter-DirectorateReform of Corporateand Risk Management


Feustel 2/8/07 3:22 PM Page 54

Management

E SA has undertaken the Inter-DirectorateReform of Corporate and Risk Managementto strengthen the Agency’s internal

operations. The reform was completed at theend of 2006, encompassing five dedicatedprojects on Risk Management, Agency-WideControlling System, Project Plan and IntegratedProject Review, General Budget Structure andCharging Policy, and Corporate InformationSystems. It has contributed to improvedmanagement of the Agency’s internal opera-tions by engaging all internal stakeholders in acommon objective, introducing improvements toplanning and management methods, elaboratingconsolidated information structures and tools,contributing to enhanced transparency andaccountability, and by providing qualified newpolicies, processes and tools.

Why Do We Need to Change?All organisations, whatever theiractivities, markets, products or services,must adapt to a rapidly changingenvironment in order to maintain theirability to operate and competesuccessfully.

By any standards, ESA is ratedworldwide as a success. Its challengingenvironment requires that it must

Jörg Feustel-Büechl, Harald Arend, Eric Derio,Giovanni Infante, Gerhard Kreiner, Jesse Phaler& Michael TabbertInter-Directorate Reform Team, Paris, France;Frascati, Italy; Noordwijk, The Netherlands;Darmstadt, Germany

esa bulletin 129 - february 2007 55

Strengthening theManagement of ESAStrengthening theManagement of ESA




constantly strive to keep pace withtrends and evolutions within Europeand internationally, adapting to thedemands that these place upon it. Itmust respond quickly and effectively tothe demands from the ESA Council ofMinisters, from Member-State Delega-tions, from industry and from its variouspartners. It has to stay at the forefront ofmodern management practice, whiletaking care to balance this with therealities of the political context in whichit has to operate.

The Ministerial Council in Berlin inDecember 2005 passed a Resolutioncalling on the Agency to strengthenfurther the management of its internaloperations. In addition, the targets setby the Director General in his Agenda2007 and Agenda 2011, therequirements of the various delegate-bodies of the Agency, as well as otherinternal and external factors, willcontinue to have an impact on ESAactivities.

These requirements call for anappropriate and timely response withinthe Agency in order to reinforce its roleand efficiency. The Inter-DirectorateReform takes up the need to improve theinternal corporate and Directoratemanagement through dedicated projects.

The Five Inter-Directorate Reform ProjectsThe Inter-Directorate Reform Projects

established process aim to support thecoherent flow of critical informationprovided and required by the variousmanagement layers, while highlightingthe role and responsibilities of themanagers to achieve their objectives.The other significant improvement hasbeen made to the Agency-level riskmanagement. The risk information isconsolidated at Agency level andsupports the decision-making, both forstrategic ‘executive risks’ and thoserelated to projects or activities thatconcern ESA as a whole.

As a result, the Agency’s risk-manage-ment capability and awareness areexpected to benefit from these improve-ments, with the implementation bymanagers of the revised policy and thenew and coherent process in their dailytasks throughout the Agency.

Agency-Wide Controlling SystemIn view of the lack of a thoroughcorporate information and controllingconcept, the Director General decidedto establish an Agency-Wide Control-ling System (AWCS). The objective is toenhance the Agency’s capacity forforecasting and planning expendituresand achieving better cost-control atDirectorate and corporate levels. Thissystem comprises controlling functionsat the corporate level and in all businessunits, that is, in all Directorates. Thisfederated approach to control iscompatible with the present overallorganisation of ESA and supports theDirector General and his Directors intheir executive-level decision-making.

In order to ensure an efficientimplementation of the AWCS, the newCorporate Controlling Division ischarged with enhancing and harmon-ising the controlling procedures andprocesses of the Agency, with theobjective of establishing and applying a

are aiming to improve the internalworking methods, and so touch all ofthe Agency’s nine Directorates. TheDirector of Reforms (D/REF) wasmandated by Council and the DirectorGeneral to lead these projects, involvingall the implicated partners in an agreedway and reporting regularly to the ESADirector’s Committee. He has led,together with his project managers, eachproject up to full qualification of a newor revised policy and process, and hasthen handed it over to the relevantDirectorates for implementation.

Objectives, Content and ResultsRisk ManagementRisk management plays an importantrole in the management of Agencyprojects and in managing ESA as a

common set of standards throughoutESA. This Division is intensivelycooperating with the also-new BusinessUnit Controllers in programme andsupport Directorates.

The major task of the project was todefine and implement a system forintegrated planning, monitoring andreporting of the progress, financialcommitments and expenditures, work-force, schedule, risks and geographicalreturn of all Agency activities.

The reform project encompassed thefollowing detailed activities:

– the definition of an overall approach,uniform methods and procedures forestablishing plans, forecasting, moni-toring and reporting;

– the development of common cost-management methods and procedures;

– the selection and implementation ofenhancements and the deployment ofappropriate information-technologytools;

– the validation of overall processes,procedures and tools;

– the harmonisation of reportingrequirements of Delegations.

Building upon and enhancing andharmonising the existing methods andprocedures for control, as applied in the

Agency, the reform project ensured thatthere is continuity of operations andthat ESA fully exploits its existingknowhow in this field. The AWCSproject worked closely with the ProjectPlan and Integrated Project Reviewproject, and established a planning toolthat is essential for corporate planningand monitoring.

As a result of this project we canconsider the following elements:

– an Agency-wide controlling organisa-tion with a Corporate Controller andBusiness Unit Controllers in allDirectorates is operational.

– a regular In-Year Reporting systemwith monthly reports to the DirectorGeneral and the Directors Committeehas been implemented. It reports onthe financial status, workforce, majorachievements and issues, geographicalreturn, schedule and risks per businessunit, provides overall Agency statusand proposes internal managementactions and decisions.

– a common database, the Multi-YearPlan, has been established, incorpora-ting short-, medium- and long-termdata such as financial commitmentsand expenditures, workforce, schedule,risks and geographical return of allAgency activities.

whole. As critical as it is to projects toensure their delivery, it is for the Agencyto demonstrate its capabilities andpreparedness for setting up andpursuing its objectives. The fact thatESA has been able to deliver successfulprojects in an environment dominatedby uncertainties is clear evidence thatproject managers are managing risks.The weakness in the current risk-management practices is the multitudeof different approaches.

The objective of the project wastherefore to consolidate a framework fora coherent and effective Agency-widerisk-management policy and process,enhancing existing practices andproviding for meaningful risk reportingat Directorate and corporate level insupport of project management andinformed decision-making.

In order to achieve these objectives,the project reviewed existing risk-management practices, which providethe basis for a common processframework. The major result from theproject is the elaboration of an updatedAgency risk-management policyaccompanied by a detailed processdescription for practical risk manage-ment for projects and activities.

The updated policy and the newly

Reform

esa bulletin 129 - february 2007esa bulletin 129 - february 2007 www.esa.intwww.esa.int 5756

Management

The Multi-Year Plan for the Agency-Wide Controlling SystemThe Inter-Directorate Reform projects, objectives and mainresults: the five projects performed during 2006 with objectivesboth in the corporate and Directorate domains

The risk management cycle and responsibilities


constantly strive to keep pace withtrends and evolutions within Europeand internationally, adapting to thedemands that these place upon it. Itmust respond quickly and effectively tothe demands from the ESA Council ofMinisters, from Member-State Delega-tions, from industry and from its variouspartners. It has to stay at the forefront ofmodern management practice, whiletaking care to balance this with therealities of the political context in whichit has to operate.

The Ministerial Council in Berlin inDecember 2005 passed a Resolutioncalling on the Agency to strengthenfurther the management of its internaloperations. In addition, the targets setby the Director General in his Agenda2007 and Agenda 2011, therequirements of the various delegate-bodies of the Agency, as well as otherinternal and external factors, willcontinue to have an impact on ESAactivities.

These requirements call for anappropriate and timely response withinthe Agency in order to reinforce its roleand efficiency. The Inter-DirectorateReform takes up the need to improve theinternal corporate and Directoratemanagement through dedicated projects.

The Five Inter-Directorate Reform ProjectsThe Inter-Directorate Reform Projects

established process aim to support thecoherent flow of critical informationprovided and required by the variousmanagement layers, while highlightingthe role and responsibilities of themanagers to achieve their objectives.The other significant improvement hasbeen made to the Agency-level riskmanagement. The risk information isconsolidated at Agency level andsupports the decision-making, both forstrategic ‘executive risks’ and thoserelated to projects or activities thatconcern ESA as a whole.

As a result, the Agency’s risk-manage-ment capability and awareness areexpected to benefit from these improve-ments, with the implementation bymanagers of the revised policy and thenew and coherent process in their dailytasks throughout the Agency.

Agency-Wide Controlling SystemIn view of the lack of a thoroughcorporate information and controllingconcept, the Director General decidedto establish an Agency-Wide Control-ling System (AWCS). The objective is toenhance the Agency’s capacity forforecasting and planning expendituresand achieving better cost-control atDirectorate and corporate levels. Thissystem comprises controlling functionsat the corporate level and in all businessunits, that is, in all Directorates. Thisfederated approach to control iscompatible with the present overallorganisation of ESA and supports theDirector General and his Directors intheir executive-level decision-making.

In order to ensure an efficientimplementation of the AWCS, the newCorporate Controlling Division ischarged with enhancing and harmon-ising the controlling procedures andprocesses of the Agency, with theobjective of establishing and applying a

are aiming to improve the internalworking methods, and so touch all ofthe Agency’s nine Directorates. TheDirector of Reforms (D/REF) wasmandated by Council and the DirectorGeneral to lead these projects, involvingall the implicated partners in an agreedway and reporting regularly to the ESADirector’s Committee. He has led,together with his project managers, eachproject up to full qualification of a newor revised policy and process, and hasthen handed it over to the relevantDirectorates for implementation.

Objectives, Content and ResultsRisk ManagementRisk management plays an importantrole in the management of Agencyprojects and in managing ESA as a

common set of standards throughoutESA. This Division is intensivelycooperating with the also-new BusinessUnit Controllers in programme andsupport Directorates.

The major task of the project was todefine and implement a system forintegrated planning, monitoring andreporting of the progress, financialcommitments and expenditures, work-force, schedule, risks and geographicalreturn of all Agency activities.

The reform project encompassed thefollowing detailed activities:

– the definition of an overall approach,uniform methods and procedures forestablishing plans, forecasting, moni-toring and reporting;

– the development of common cost-management methods and procedures;

– the selection and implementation ofenhancements and the deployment ofappropriate information-technologytools;

– the validation of overall processes,procedures and tools;

– the harmonisation of reportingrequirements of Delegations.

Building upon and enhancing andharmonising the existing methods andprocedures for control, as applied in the

Agency, the reform project ensured thatthere is continuity of operations andthat ESA fully exploits its existingknowhow in this field. The AWCSproject worked closely with the ProjectPlan and Integrated Project Reviewproject, and established a planning toolthat is essential for corporate planningand monitoring.

As a result of this project we canconsider the following elements:

– an Agency-wide controlling organisa-tion with a Corporate Controller andBusiness Unit Controllers in allDirectorates is operational.

– a regular In-Year Reporting systemwith monthly reports to the DirectorGeneral and the Directors Committeehas been implemented. It reports onthe financial status, workforce, majorachievements and issues, geographicalreturn, schedule and risks per businessunit, provides overall Agency statusand proposes internal managementactions and decisions.

– a common database, the Multi-YearPlan, has been established, incorpora-ting short-, medium- and long-termdata such as financial commitmentsand expenditures, workforce, schedule,risks and geographical return of allAgency activities.

whole. As critical as it is to projects toensure their delivery, it is for the Agencyto demonstrate its capabilities andpreparedness for setting up andpursuing its objectives. The fact thatESA has been able to deliver successfulprojects in an environment dominatedby uncertainties is clear evidence thatproject managers are managing risks.The weakness in the current risk-management practices is the multitudeof different approaches.

The objective of the project wastherefore to consolidate a framework fora coherent and effective Agency-widerisk-management policy and process,enhancing existing practices andproviding for meaningful risk reportingat Directorate and corporate level insupport of project management andinformed decision-making.

In order to achieve these objectives,the project reviewed existing risk-management practices, which providethe basis for a common processframework. The major result from theproject is the elaboration of an updatedAgency risk-management policyaccompanied by a detailed processdescription for practical risk manage-ment for projects and activities.

The updated policy and the newly

Reform


Management

The Multi-Year Plan for the Agency-Wide Controlling SystemThe Inter-Directorate Reform projects, objectives and mainresults: the five projects performed during 2006 with objectivesboth in the corporate and Directorate domains

The risk management cycle and responsibilities


This corporate tool is already fullysupporting the In-Year reports and willbe continuously improved to be used asthe corporate database for the LongTerm Plan (LTP), the Quarterly Reportto Council (QRC), the Budget Planningand other reporting elements using thiscommon base.

Project Plan and Integrated Project ReviewThe overall objective of the Project Planand Integrated Project Review (IPRev)project was to support the coherentdefinition, planning, implementation,review and follow-up of Agencyprogrammes, projects and other majoractivities.

To achieve this objective, the projectdefined the policy and process for theelaboration of Project Plans and for thepreparation and conduct of IPRevs, anddetermined requirements for theconfiguration control of Project Plansand their data consolidation at theoverall Agency level. This included theselection of an associated informationsystem tool. The overall Project Planand IPRev process was validatedthrough the development of a set ofpriority Project Plans decided by theDirector General, and the conduct ofthe associated IPRevs.

General Budget Structure and ChargingPolicyIn the past decade, ESA’s GeneralBudget has grown considerably and itsstructure has become more complex,owing in particular to the evolution ofthe associated charging policy. In 2005,the Director General initiated athorough internal management investi-gation to identify potential improve-ments and simplifications.

The General Budget Structure andCharging Policy reform project is afollow-on activity of a project carriedout in 2005, which encompassed thefollowing activities:

– identification within the current cor-porate and administrative costs of thesustaining activities to be financed bythe mandatory contributions (Level ofResources) and of the non-corporateactivities to be financed byprogrammes through the rechargingmechanism;

– reinforcement of a more transparentand user-oriented structure andclarification between support andprogramme Directorates;

– provision of a simple framework forsupport Directorates to charge costsof services provided to programmes;

– provision of a basis for analytical costaccounting and effective managementof costs and charges, through aclearer, user-oriented structure.

The proposed revision of the GeneralBudget structure and its charging policyleads to greater transparency andaccountability of the various servicesand activities performed within thisbudget. Particular emphasis was put onachieving the following benefits:– improved definition of end-to-end

functions and their cost charging forthe various activities and services;

Project PlanThe Project Plan is a new internalstandard tool that defines an ESAproject through three major elements:

– the project description, encompassingthe project objectives, scope, externaland internal framework, the procure-ment and phasing plan, the projectorganisation, the risk assessment andthe master schedule and keymilestones.

– the support agreements, addressinginternal support (e.g. technical,operational, procurement) and theassociated manpower deployment.

– the financial planning, coveringcommitment and expenditure plansand geographical return targets.

There are three types of plans, whichevolve in scope and granularity over aproject’s lifetime. A Preliminary ProjectPlan is elaborated at the end of Phase-A,before preparing a Programme Proposalto ESA Member States. It defines theglobal project objectives, parametersand risks. A Core Project Plan iselaborated before entering Phase-C/D/Eand provides the detailed projectplanning elements. Periodic DetailedAnnexes are established in Phase-C/D/E

– increased user orientation of admini-strative and support services.

A final report has been provided inorder to use further the results withinthe Financial Reform.

Particular emphasis has been put onachieving an improved definition ofend–to-end functions and their costcharging for the various activities andservices, as well as an increased userorientation of administrative andsupport services.

For this purpose a clear grouping hasbeen established, with ‘Basic Activities’to be funded by the Level of Resourcesand ‘Support Activities’ to be fundedthrough a charging process. The salientpoints of the new structure are thecreation of a family regrouping allactivities relating to: Research, Tech-nology, Education and now includingBasic Technical activities and theseparation between corporate andadministrative cost. The grouping of allcorporate investments into a singlefamily including basic maintenance andtheir related management costs, and theextension of the principles of customer/supplier relationship for a wider rangeof services and support activities arefurther essential proposed changes.

For the Charging Policy, the presentsystem has been considered generallysound and it is proposed largely tomaintain it. However, some adjustmentsare proposed to allow a fairer and more

equitable implementation, a leaneroperating effort and an incentive tooptimise service delivery, resulting incost reductions.

All this should should lead to a moredirect costing of services to programmes,a redistribution of indirect rechargesand, last but not least, greater responsi-bility and accountability on the part ofservice suppliers and, through that, amore user-oriented General Budget andincreased cost-effectiveness

Corporate Information SystemsThe main objective of the project was toestablish the framework for providingadequate corporate information systemssupport for users throughout ESA.

The Agency’s corporate informationsystems are currently based on several

to identify any necessary updates to theCore Project Plan.

Integrated Project ReviewThe Integrated Project Review is aversatile optional tool, which theDirector General may apply for twomajor purposes: either to clear ProjectPlans for authorisation, or to assess thestatus or risks of projects. The reviewthus supports ESA top management atthe time of major project decisions.IPRevs are chaired by the DirectorGeneral and attended by the keyDirectors involved in the project, inparticular the support Directorates. Anindependent assessment by a small teamof ESA experts from other Directoratescan support the IPRev upon request bythe Director General. Such anindependent assessment is mandatoryfor all Preliminary Project Plans.

The main result of the project is thefully qualified policy and process for theestablishment of Project Plans andIntegrated Project Reviews. This policyand process were successfully applied forthe definition of 16 Project Plans(GMES Space Component, Alphabus,Alphasat, ExoMars, Artes 11 Small GeoPlatform, FLPP-2, Gaia, Soyuz@CSG,ELIPS-2, ESAC, Asbestos Removal,Corporate Controlling, General Budget,Risk Management, Corporate Informa-tion Systems, Financial Reform), theconduct of 14 Integrated ProjectReviews and the performance of nineindependent assessments.

The Project Plan and IPRev will be anessential tool for the preparation of allnew proposals prior to the submissionof programme proposals to ESAMember States, in particular in view ofthe Ministerial Council meeting in 2008.It will be an equally important tool forfollowing projects throughout theirentire life-spans.

Reform


Management

The Project Plan and Integrated Project Review cycle The General Budget

The Corporate Information Systems policy


This corporate tool is already fullysupporting the In-Year reports and willbe continuously improved to be used asthe corporate database for the LongTerm Plan (LTP), the Quarterly Reportto Council (QRC), the Budget Planningand other reporting elements using thiscommon base.

Project Plan and Integrated Project ReviewThe overall objective of the Project Planand Integrated Project Review (IPRev)project was to support the coherentdefinition, planning, implementation,review and follow-up of Agencyprogrammes, projects and other majoractivities.

To achieve this objective, the projectdefined the policy and process for theelaboration of Project Plans and for thepreparation and conduct of IPRevs, anddetermined requirements for theconfiguration control of Project Plansand their data consolidation at theoverall Agency level. This included theselection of an associated informationsystem tool. The overall Project Planand IPRev process was validatedthrough the development of a set ofpriority Project Plans decided by theDirector General, and the conduct ofthe associated IPRevs.

General Budget Structure and ChargingPolicyIn the past decade, ESA’s GeneralBudget has grown considerably and itsstructure has become more complex,owing in particular to the evolution ofthe associated charging policy. In 2005,the Director General initiated athorough internal management investi-gation to identify potential improve-ments and simplifications.

The General Budget Structure andCharging Policy reform project is afollow-on activity of a project carriedout in 2005, which encompassed thefollowing activities:

– identification within the current cor-porate and administrative costs of thesustaining activities to be financed bythe mandatory contributions (Level ofResources) and of the non-corporateactivities to be financed byprogrammes through the rechargingmechanism;

– reinforcement of a more transparentand user-oriented structure andclarification between support andprogramme Directorates;

– provision of a simple framework forsupport Directorates to charge costsof services provided to programmes;

– provision of a basis for analytical costaccounting and effective managementof costs and charges, through aclearer, user-oriented structure.

The proposed revision of the GeneralBudget structure and its charging policyleads to greater transparency andaccountability of the various servicesand activities performed within thisbudget. Particular emphasis was put onachieving the following benefits:– improved definition of end-to-end

functions and their cost charging forthe various activities and services;

Project PlanThe Project Plan is a new internalstandard tool that defines an ESAproject through three major elements:

– the project description, encompassingthe project objectives, scope, externaland internal framework, the procure-ment and phasing plan, the projectorganisation, the risk assessment andthe master schedule and keymilestones.

– the support agreements, addressinginternal support (e.g. technical,operational, procurement) and theassociated manpower deployment.

– the financial planning, coveringcommitment and expenditure plansand geographical return targets.

There are three types of plans, whichevolve in scope and granularity over aproject’s lifetime. A Preliminary ProjectPlan is elaborated at the end of Phase-A,before preparing a Programme Proposalto ESA Member States. It defines theglobal project objectives, parametersand risks. A Core Project Plan iselaborated before entering Phase-C/D/Eand provides the detailed projectplanning elements. Periodic DetailedAnnexes are established in Phase-C/D/E

– increased user orientation of admini-strative and support services.

A final report has been provided inorder to use further the results withinthe Financial Reform.

Particular emphasis has been put onachieving an improved definition ofend–to-end functions and their costcharging for the various activities andservices, as well as an increased userorientation of administrative andsupport services.

For this purpose a clear grouping hasbeen established, with ‘Basic Activities’to be funded by the Level of Resourcesand ‘Support Activities’ to be fundedthrough a charging process. The salientpoints of the new structure are thecreation of a family regrouping allactivities relating to: Research, Tech-nology, Education and now includingBasic Technical activities and theseparation between corporate andadministrative cost. The grouping of allcorporate investments into a singlefamily including basic maintenance andtheir related management costs, and theextension of the principles of customer/supplier relationship for a wider rangeof services and support activities arefurther essential proposed changes.

For the Charging Policy, the presentsystem has been considered generallysound and it is proposed largely tomaintain it. However, some adjustmentsare proposed to allow a fairer and more

equitable implementation, a leaneroperating effort and an incentive tooptimise service delivery, resulting incost reductions.

All this should should lead to a moredirect costing of services to programmes,a redistribution of indirect rechargesand, last but not least, greater responsi-bility and accountability on the part ofservice suppliers and, through that, amore user-oriented General Budget andincreased cost-effectiveness

Corporate Information SystemsThe main objective of the project was toestablish the framework for providingadequate corporate information systemssupport for users throughout ESA.

The Agency’s corporate informationsystems are currently based on several

to identify any necessary updates to theCore Project Plan.

Integrated Project ReviewThe Integrated Project Review is aversatile optional tool, which theDirector General may apply for twomajor purposes: either to clear ProjectPlans for authorisation, or to assess thestatus or risks of projects. The reviewthus supports ESA top management atthe time of major project decisions.IPRevs are chaired by the DirectorGeneral and attended by the keyDirectors involved in the project, inparticular the support Directorates. Anindependent assessment by a small teamof ESA experts from other Directoratescan support the IPRev upon request bythe Director General. Such anindependent assessment is mandatoryfor all Preliminary Project Plans.

The main result of the project is thefully qualified policy and process for theestablishment of Project Plans andIntegrated Project Reviews. This policyand process were successfully applied forthe definition of 16 Project Plans(GMES Space Component, Alphabus,Alphasat, ExoMars, Artes 11 Small GeoPlatform, FLPP-2, Gaia, Soyuz@CSG,ELIPS-2, ESAC, Asbestos Removal,Corporate Controlling, General Budget,Risk Management, Corporate Informa-tion Systems, Financial Reform), theconduct of 14 Integrated ProjectReviews and the performance of nineindependent assessments.

The Project Plan and IPRev will be anessential tool for the preparation of allnew proposals prior to the submissionof programme proposals to ESAMember States, in particular in view ofthe Ministerial Council meeting in 2008.It will be an equally important tool forfollowing projects throughout theirentire life-spans.

Reform


Management

The Project Plan and Integrated Project Review cycle The General Budget

The Corporate Information Systems policy


application and technological frame-works, providing often incoherent andfragmented data structures. In order toconsolidate and solidify these existingsystems and their future development,the project aimed to elaborate require-ments for a solid and viable informationsystem service at the Agency level.Furthermore, it aimed to deliveraccording to these principles solutionsfor the new corporate needs in order tosupport the new corporate functionsinstigated by the other reform projects,in particular those of CorporateControlling and Project Plans, andsupporting other needs such as theestablishment of financial plans for theESA Long Term Plan.

In order to achieve the above object-ives, a policy was established outlining

the guiding principles for developingand maintaining efficient and effectiveinformation systems and tools at thecorporate level supporting the usersAgency-wide. The policy also identifiesthe roles and responsibilities governingthe management of corporate informa-tion systems services, and introduces keyfeatures, such as the technology andapplication architecture and commondata structures.

Further, the project succeeded indelivering for Corporate Controlling anoperational tool using existing datastructures and supporting users in allDirectorates. The establishment of thiscommon tool engaged all stakeholdersinto a common dialogue and tookbenefit of the existing solutions in theAgency. The policy framework estab-

lished in parallel aims at ensuring thatsuch synergies are pursued in otherundertakings in the future.

AcknowledgementThe Inter-Directorate Reform effort wascompleted by the end of 2006 withproposals for new policies and processesthat should improve the Agency’smanagerial effectiveness. The challengenow is to put them into effect, for thebenefit of ESA, its managers andprojects, programmes and activities. Thegeneration of all these results waspossible only due to the strong supportof participants in all Directorates,working together towards commongoals, seeking to improve the way wemanage our activities and ESA as awhole. e

Reform

esa bulletin 129 - february 2007 www.esa.int60


Strengthening the Jörg Feustel-Büechl, Harald …Management ESA has undertaken the Inter-Directorate Reform of Corporate and Risk Management to strengthen the Agency’s internal

Documents