1 incremental commitment model as applied to dod acquisition insights from a business process model...
Post on 21-Dec-2015
218 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
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
GovernmentProgram Office
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
GovernmentProgram Office
SystemsEngineering
AoAGuidance
AoAPlan
ASR
AoAReport
TD RFP(s)TD Plan
TESOther
GovernmentProgram Office
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
• 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
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
• Allocate systems to subsystems
• Sub system specification
System level requirements
Initial Design of End Item
• User Rqts (CDD)• Preliminary system costs• Test considerations• Program protection issues• Mature technologies• ……
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)
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
top related