1 incremental commitment model as applied to dod acquisition insights from a business process model...

1

Incremental Commitment Model as Applied to DoD Acquisition

Insights from a Business Process Model of DoD Acquisition Policy and SE Guidance

Dr. Judith DahmannThe MITRE Corporation

2

Background

• Updates to DoD acquisition regulations (DoD 5000) are underway

• Defense Acquisition Guide (DAG) (particularly SE guidance) is being updated to address the changes in acquisition regulation

• A Business Process Model of DoD 5000 and SE Guidance has been constructed to provide technical support to this process

Acquisition is a complex process requiring systems thinking and SE analysis like other complex systems

3

DoD Acquisition Regulations and Guidance

RegulationsDoDI 5000.02

GuidanceDefense Acquisition Guide

Ch Topics1 Decision Support Systems2 Acquisition Strategy3 Affordability & Life-Cycle Estimates4 Systems Engineering5 Life Cycle Logistics6 Human Systems Integration7 IT & NSS8 Intelligence9 Test & Evaluation10 Assessments and Reporting11 Program Management

Focus of current activity

Context is worth 50 IQ Points

4

CBAJoint Concepts

MS CMS B

Strategic Guidance

MS A

ICD TechnologyDevelopment CDD

Engineering and Manufacturing

Development and Demonstration

CPDProduction and

Deployment O&SMDD

Materiel Solution Analysis

CDRPDR

Draft Early Acquisition Policy Changes*

Materiel Development

Decision (MDD)

Full Rate ProductionDecision Review

Coordination Draft, DoDI 5000.02

JCIDS Process

Competing prototypes before MS B

PDR and a PDR report to the MDA before MS B (moves MS B to the right)

Early Acquisition

5

Why is this hard?• Very little experience with current pre- Milestone B

SE guidance – Makes it difficult to know what to ‘adjust’ given changes

• The current DAG guidance is voluminous – Online resource with over 500 printed pages of

information without hotlinks

• Limited understanding about the interdependencies among the guidance provided to the program office from different perspectives – Any added SE guidance will compete attention from

already over burdened program office

• Consequently, it was important to understand how SE fits into the context of early acquisition– What is the relationship between SE and guidance for

other areas

Need a structured approach to understanding how SE fits into larger context

6

Why Business Process Modeling?

• Business process modeling (BPM) rapidly articulates processes and relationships– Supports communication and common understanding among

stakeholders– Provides a means for understanding relationships among concurrent

stakeholder activities

• Information to update the DAG is closely aligned to information for the pilot model; efficient leveraging of effort

• Objective is to support understanding of how SE fits into the larger context of DoD 5000 and guidance

• An BPM model has been developed to address SE guidance in context of regulations and other guidance ‘lanes’ addressing– Proposed DoD 5000– SE guidance (draft updates to DAG Chapter 4)– Relationships between SE guidance and 5000 and guidance in other

DAG chapters (limited)Model provides a framework to articulate the role

and relationship of early SE

7

Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN)

• Open standard maintained by the Object Management Group (OMG)– Allows organizations the ability to communicate processes in a standard manner– Facilitates understanding of performance collaborations and business

transactions between organizations (B2B)

• Numerous COTS vendors support BPMN– AGM implemented using iGrafx Process 2007

• Allows for model Simulation, XPDL export (for sharing with other tools)

• AGM is a Process Model, not only a graphical flow chart, but process can be analyzed and simulated

• BPMN graphical elements depict ordered sequence of business process– Notation designed to coordinate sequence of processes and message flows

between different process participants in a related set of activities

• BPMN Objects– Task (Rectangle): Activity, Process, Sub-Process– Event (Circle): Send/Receive Message, Start Event, End Event– Gateway (Diamond): Merge, Fork, Join– Information Flow (Dashed Line): Between Swimlanes– Process Flow (Solid Line): Within Swimlane

Task

Event

Gateway

8

Approach

• Iterative approach to building, reviewing, applying the model– Begin with a ‘first pass’ rapid development based

on the current 5000 documentation using ‘surrogate’ subject matter expert (SME)

– Review ‘first pass’ model with SMEs– Update (second pass), review and revise– Conduct an initial assessment, review and revise

in collaboration with stakeholders

• Use model as a framework for enterprise level exchanges

Version 1.0 if the model is in place and in use Work in progress

9

Notional Initial Model Layout 5

00

0G

uid

an

ce

MDD MS A MS B

CDR

AoAPlanning

AoAConduct

AoA Review& MS A Prep

PrototypePlanning

PrototypeConduct

PrototypeAssessment

PreliminaryDesign

Prep forMS B

Development

PDR

SE

Ch 4

Represent the SE actions, technical reviews, and products based on ESEWG drafts

Decision Support Systems

Acquisition Strategy

Affordability

Life Cycle Logistics

Human Systems Integration

IT & NSS

Intelligence

Test & Evaluation

Assessments and Reporting

Program Management

Other

JCIDS

Ch 1

Ch 2

Ch 3

Ch 5

Ch 6

Ch 7

Ch 8

Ch 9

Ch 10

Ch 11

10

Birdseye View of the Model

Model provides a way to visualize MDD to MS B

MDD MS A MS B

Best viewed as 4’ x 10’ version

AoA

PDR

11

Results• Clear description of

– Key elements of new DoD 5000– Relationship among the guidance across the DAG chapters– Focus for SE Guidance during early phases of acquisition

process including• A framework for ‘enterprise’ discussion

– Showing the numerous guidance ‘lanes’ and where they provide guidance to an acquisition program

– Identifying issues in aligning guidance with changes in policy

– Establishing SE relationships with other guidance ‘lanes’ – Demonstrating SE contributions to acquisition process and

work in other lanes• A mechanism for identifying and addressing issues

e.g.– SE best practices pre- MS A– Impact of moving MS B to follow Preliminary Design ReviewModel provides a framework to look at issues

across various guidance lanes

12

MDD MS A

5000

JCIDS

SE

OtherLanes

MDD MS A

5000

JCIDS

SE

OtherLanes

Example: Best Practices for MDD to MS A

Key SE Activities, Events and Products and Their Support to Program Planning

MDD MS AMaterial Solution Analysis

ConductAoA

Initial userassessment of capability

needs

ICD

StudyEfforts

Engineering Analysis of Preferred

Systems Solution(s)

SEP

TDS

JCIDS

GovernmentProgram Office

SystemsEngineering

AoAGuidance

AoAPlan

ASR

AoAReport

TD RFP(s)TD Plan

TESOther


Activities

Technical Planning for MS A

ITR

PSC

AreasDepending

on SE input

MDD MS AMaterial Solution Analysis

ConductAoA

Initial userassessment of capability

needs

ICD

StudyEfforts

Engineering Analysis of Preferred

Systems Solution(s)

SEP

TDS

JCIDS


SystemsEngineering

AoAGuidance

AoAPlan

ASR

AoAReport

TD RFP(s)TD Plan

TESOther


Activities

Technical Planning for MS A

ITR

PSC

AreasDepending

on SE input

AoA

Upfront Engineering Analysis

MDD to MS ASlice

SE & AoA

SE informsDecision Documents

• Provided basis for DAG SE guidance on• Key SE Activities• Impact on program planning

• Critical role for early program office SE•Advise and review AoA•Engineering analysis of

recommended solution for TDS technical planning

13

Example: Moving Milestone B to follow PDR

PDR has been an SE event; change impacts a range of considerations outside of SE

PDR

System level requirements

• User Rqts (CDD)• System costs• Test considerations• Program protection issues• Mature technologies• ……

Inputs• User Rqts (CDD)• System costs• Test considerations• Program protection issues• Mature technologies• ……

Inputs

MS B Products

• Allocate systems to subsystems

• Sub system specification

Initial Design of End Item

System Specification

(Type A)

SW DevelopmentSpecification

(Type B)

HW DevelopmentSpecification

(Type B)

Test EquipmentDevelopmentSpecification

(Type B)

SW ProductSpecification

(Type C)

Unit A ProductSpecification

(Type C)

Unit B ProductSpecification

(Type C)

Assembly 1 ProcessSpecification

(Type D)

Sub Assembly MaterialSpecification

(Type D)

Products





(Type A)


(Type B)


(Type B)


(Type B)


(Type C)


(Type C)


(Type C)


(Type D)


(Type D)

Products

MS B

Inputs needed to support design of the end item Inputs needed to support design of the end item are now produced as part of the MS B revieware now produced as part of the MS B review

PDR



System level requirements


• User Rqts (CDD)• Preliminary system costs• Test considerations• Program protection issues• Mature technologies• ……


(Type A)


(Type B)


(Type B)


(Type B)


(Type C)


(Type C)


(Type C)


(Type D)


(Type D)

Inputs

Knowledge MS B Products

Products

MS B••Inputs to preliminary design Inputs to preliminary design need to be provided during need to be provided during TD TD

•• The product of preliminary The product of preliminary design provides a knowledge design provides a knowledge base for MS B productsbase for MS B products

Topic of a July workshop to address the impact of the change across the guidance lanes (e.g. DAG Chapters)

Preliminary Design PDR

MS B

DOD 5000.2

JCIDS

SEChapter

4

RemainingChapters

KnowledgeTo Inform

Design

DesignKnowledgeTo InformMS B

Model provided a framework for enterprise level discussion Identified key inputs needed prior to preliminary design including

User requirements, cost constraints, critical technologies, critical protection items

Preliminary Design ‘Slice’ of Model

14

So what does this have to do with ICM?

• Basic tenets of the Incremental Commitment Model (ICM)– Decision are made about an acquisition

• incrementally at • key anchor points based on • evidence and • assessment of risk

• Past workshops have noted the gross similarity between ICM and major DoD Acquisition milestones– Misses the importance of smaller, incremental and iterative

steps• A review of the results of the current model of DoD

policy and guidance shows a series of cross lane, checkpoints between major milestones

This ‘pattern’ in the model suggests a ‘natural’ application of ICM to Defense Acquisition

15

Patterns in the Model• ‘Natural’ synchronization points from MDD to MS B

– Points at which input from across lanes support action– Results of the action lead to feedback to each lane for next product

Wave pattern of interactions

MDD MS A MS B

71 3 4 5 6

MDDMandatoryEntry toAcquisition

FeasibleSystemDesign

MS A System LevelSpecification

PreliminaryDesign

MS B

2

Rec’dMaterialSolution

AoA

PDR

16

Wave Patterns in the Model• ‘Natural’ synchronization points from MDD to MS B

– Points at which input from across lanes support activity/decisions– Results of the action lead to feedback to each lane for next product

Series of points at which there are broad cross lane interactions

MDD MS A MS B

71 3 4 5 6

MDDMandatoryMaterialDecision

FeasibleSystemDesign

MS A System LevelSpecification

PreliminaryDesign

MS B Rec’dMaterialSolution

2

17

An Example: Feasible Design

Develop Feasible System Design

Review System Design

Design based on inputs from other areas (‘Lanes’)

Users

Results provide input to other areas (‘Lanes’)

Tech Maturity Assessment

SE Plan

Activities within lanes then process results for input at next point

MDD MS A MS B

18

Question…

• Are these patterns suggestive of ‘natural’ anchor points ala ICM?– Points at which your would do well to review evidence

from across the areas in the program to assess risk and make an incremental decision about next steps?

• If so, what would you recommend to program management office and systems of the appropriate actions at these points?

What does this say about opportunities to apply the tenets of ICM to DoD

acquisitions?

19

Backup

20

5000

Gui

danc

e

MDD MS A MS B

CDR

AoAPlanning

AoAConduct

AoA Review& MS A Prep

PrototypePlanning

PrototypeConduct

PrototypeAssessment

PreliminaryDesign

Prep forMS B

Development

PDR

SE Ch

4

Represent the SE actions, technical reviews, and products based on ESEWG drafts

Decision Support Systems

Acquisition Strategy

Affordability

Life Cycle Logistics

Human Systems Integration

IT & NSS

Intelligence

Test & Evaluation

Assessments and Reporting

Program Management

Other

J CIDS

Ch 1

Ch 2

Ch 3

Ch 5

Ch 6

Ch 7

Ch 8

Ch 9

Ch 10

Ch 11

Initial Model Scope Concept: Focus on Early SE

Decision Lanes

First phases of acquisition process, subdivided into discrete

stagesRepresent 5000 and DAG Chapter 4 in some detailRepresent SE ‘inputs’ and outputs

Initiallyrepresent other guidance ‘lanes’ as SE sources and sinks

Include ‘other category for unknowns

1 incremental commitment model as applied to dod acquisition insights from a business process model...

Documents

added se guidance

process acquisition

se guidance draft updates

guidance lanes

se fits

current dag guidance

se analysis

guidance regulations