Reviews

Effectively the Inspector General serves as a fresh pair of eyes across the complete scope of ESA activities. His autonomy of view is supported by allowing him significant independence within the organizational structure: while the Inspector General officially reports to the Director of Technical and Quality Management he is also free to raise issues directly with ESA's Director-General when required.

As well as providing advice to the Director-General, Directors and senior management, the Inspector-General operates through three different types of review mechanisms:

• Project technical reviews – Every ESA project undergoes a certain number of major technical reviews as part of their life cycle. The Inspector General co-chairs most one of these, together with the Director who has originated the project. These Reviews examine the technical integrity of the work being done in detail, following a structure designed to highlight potential weaknesses or details that might otherwise be underestimated or neglected by the project team. A project review for a major spacecraft might typically involve 60 people, half of them coming from the project and the reminder being independent personnel from other areas. The Review is organized over about ten weeks with different panels working on a large number of Project documents. The review board discusses the significant issues and formulates, by consensus, recommendations for the Project to follow.
• Project Plan reviews – Project Plans are documents written at the start of each project which describe everything associated with it, including objectives, organizational, legal and budgetary framework, and risks. The Inspector-General organizes an Integrated Project plan Review (IPRev), which takes place at a higher managerial level than the project technical reviews. The objective is to bring the best possible degree of corporate advice to the Project concerned and to ensure that the Agency as a corporate body is ready to support the project. In many cases the IPRev is supported by an Independent Assessment conducted by five or six senior, experienced staff, who spend a few days in discussion with the project on the basis of the Plan.
• Enquiry boards and ad hoc investigations – The third type of review is anomaly investigation, typically called at short notice in response to troubling developments. Something has gone wrong to a degree above and beyond the province of ESA's Product Assurance and Safety branch and the Director General requires the Inspector General to look into the problem and make recommendations about what to do about it. The kind of anomalies being investigated might include a failed instrument, a mission that has undergone dramatic mass gain during development or the total loss of a spacecraft.

The Inspector General has a small staff who prepare review activities. He also relies on the support services of the Agency for technical advice and recommendations of people who have the particular expertise required for a given review.