ideas & products enabling your success! dayton aerospace 1 why revitalize systems engineering?...
Post on 03-Jan-2016
213 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
1Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Why Revitalize Why Revitalize Systems Engineering?Systems Engineering?
ororHow We Got To How We Got To This Point TodayThis Point Today
July 21, 2004Tom Hoog
Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
2Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Systems Engineering EulogySystems Engineering Eulogy• SE born in the 1930s as one of RCA Broadcasting Services & Standards• Military development of Ops Research in the 1940s was instrumental in shaping its youth• First formal education attempted at MIT in 1950• SE became the darling of NASA & military systems in the 1960s; processes imposed on
prime contractors• Its many offspring were Chief Systems Engineers, Directors of Engineering, VPs of
Systems Engineering as well as many Systems Engineers• It became bloated & unwieldy in late 1960s; became known as AFSCM 375-5• Attended fat farm & reappeared as Mil-Std-499A; grew in stature & acceptance• SE became check & balance in massive engineering efforts• It suffered an identity crisis when universities taught industrial engineering as systems
engineering• In the 1980s SE attempted to re-identify itself as Mil-Std-499B• Later cashiered out of the military, it found civilian employment as an IEEE standard• It wasted away with an illness brought on by rejection of its processes & bastardizing of its
techniques & methods• Design reviews became re-design meetings• SE died a lingering death in the 1990s & was replace by IPTs, Design Teams & Group
Gropes• SE is survived by & remembered by a cult of old systems engineers who still practice their
now meaningless rituals• SE was almost 70 years old at the time of its death• No services are planned
Full text of this eulogy can be found at http://acc.dau.mil/simplify/ev.php?ID=6174_201&ID2=DO_TOPIC
3Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
OutlineOutline
Background• DoD Transformation
– 5000– JCIDS– Scope of SE
• Systems Engineering Revitalization Initiatives– USD (AT&L) Imperatives– SAF/AQ Initiatives– USD (AT&L) Initiatives
• Health of SE – DAI’s View (Jul 03)
4Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
OutlineOutline
Background• DoD Transformation
– 5000– JCIDS– Scope of SE
• Systems Engineering Revitalization Initiatives– USD (AT&L) Imperatives– SAF/AQ Initiatives– USD (AT&L) Initiatives
• Health of SE – DAI’s View (Jul 03)
5Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
BackgroundBackgroundDoD Decision Support SystemsDoD Decision Support Systems
• Three parts to DoD Decision Support Systems
• Requirements Generation– Governed by CJCSI 3170.01– reissued 24 June 2003
• Defense Acquisition– Governed by 5000 series– Reissued 12 May 2003
• Financial Management – Governed by multiple sources– Being revised
Financial Management
System
Requirements Generation
System
Defense Acquisition
System
6Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Functional Area Analysis
ICD
CDD
CPD
JCIDS Analysis
Joint Operating ConceptsJoint Functional ConceptsIntegrated Architectures
Strategic PolicyGuidance
Joint Operations Concepts
DOTMLPF Changes
CJCSI 3180
Process
Functional Solution Analysis
DO
TM
LP
FA
na
lysi
s
Materiel ChangesCJCSI 3170
process
Ideas for Materiel
Approaches
Analysis of Materiel Approaches
Alternative N
Alternative 2
Alternative 1
PostIndependent
Analysis
DOTMLPF Change
Recommendation
Functional Needs
Analysis
BackgroundBackground
7Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
ADAPT INTEGRATE
THE “New” 5000 MODEL
User Needs &
Technology Opportunities
Process entry at Milestones A, B, or C
Start into Increments where appropriate
Increments are interrelated
Continues for development life of system
Adapted From DoDI 5000.2, 12 May 03
IOCBA
Concept
Refinement
Technology
Development
System Development& Demonstration
Production & Deployment
Systems Acquisition
Operations & Support
C
Sustainment
FRP DecisionReview
FOC
LRIP/OT&EDesign
Review
Pre-SystemsAcquisition
(ProgramInitiation)
ConceptDecision
System
IntegrationSystem
Demonstration
TEST AND FIELD
DEV
DEMO
DEMO
DEV DEMO
MATURE
MATURE
MATURE
ADAPT INTEGRATE
ADAPT INTEGRATE
TEST AND FIELD
TEST AND FIELD
B
B
B
C
C
C
Spiral Development - Insert technology into program when it is mature
Readiness
8Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
SE in Evolutionary Acquisition EnvironmentSE in Evolutionary Acquisition Environment
• Multiple concurrent increments lead to increased need for disciplined SE process (vs. single step process)
• Continuous requirements definition & technology maturation tasks– Complete definition of requirements
• Plan to mature requirements• Traceable from top level operational requirements to design
implementation• Inclusion of joint requirements (FoS, SoS, net–centric)• Allocation of requirements to increments
– Mature producibility, affordability, supportability, of technology as well as performance
• Need to cover both government & industry aspects
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
9Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
5000 Series Extracts5000 Series Extracts
• DoDD 5000.1– Para E 1. 27 Acquisition programs managed through
application of SE approach that optimizes total system performance & minimizes total ownership cost. A modular open systems approach shall be used
• DoDI 5000.2– Para 3.9.2.2 Sustainment uses SE methodology– Para E 7.2 Human factors is part of SE– Para 7.7 Include ESH in SE
• DoD 5000.2-R (Interim Defense Acquisition Guidebook)Para C2.3.2 Acquisition strategy includes SEPara C2.8.2 Support strategy is part of SEPara C2.8.5.5 Human factors is part of SEPara C2.8.6 ESH is part of SEPara C6.7.2.7 Critical Program Information is part of SEPara C5.2 18 pages on SE
10Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
DoD 5000.2-R, Para C5.2DoD 5000.2-R, Para C5.2• Defines what SE does• Defines the SE activities
– Requirements analysis– Functional analysis/allocation– Design synthesis & verification– System analysis & control– Manufacturing & production– Modeling & simulation– Quality– Acquisition logistics– Open systems design– Software management
• Other Design Considerations– WBS– Performance specifications– Metrics– Insensitive munitions
• COTS• Reliability, availability & maintainability• Human systems integration• Environment, Safety & operational health• Interoperability• Survivability• Mission assuredness• Information assurance• Anti-tamper provisions•Other Design considerations
•WBS•Performance Specifications•Metric system•Insensitive munitions•Value engineering•Precise time & time interval•Accessibility•Corrosion prevention & control
11Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Scope of Systems EngineeringScope of Systems Engineering
Systems Engineering
Adapted from DoDI 5000.2 12 May 2003
AcquisitionRequirements
Acquisition community participation in early requirements process to assist in understanding
12Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
SE DefinitionsSE Definitions
• Systems Engineering (SE) A comprehensive, iterative Technical Management (TM) process that includes translating operational requirements into configured systems, integrating the technical inputs of the entire design team, managing interfaces, characterizing and managing technical risk, transitioning technology from the technology base into program specific efforts, and verifying that designs meet operational needs. It is a life cycle activity that demands a concurrent approach to both product and process development. (11th Glossary of DoD Acqu Terms)
• Systems Engineering - An inter-disciplinary approach and means to enable the realization of successful systems. (EIA 731.1)
13Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Some Systems Engineering CharacteristicsSome Systems Engineering Characteristics
• Encompasses government and contractor efforts– Either may lead– Some joint
• Iterative process at multiple levels– System level – Subsystem/component level
• Specific tasks depend on program phase– Pre-Acquisition, Acquisition, Sustainment
• Specific focus of tasks/trades depends on type of program– New, modification– Prime or support equipment; system or subsystem– Aircraft, space, electronics, armament– Complete system, subsystem, System of Systems / Family of
Systems
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
14Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
System Engineering Focus Shifts over System Engineering Focus Shifts over Program Life Cycle Program Life Cycle
• Pre-Acquisition– Operational & system performance requirements – Life cycle affordability requirements
• Acquisition– Design requirements & implementation– Manufacturability, supportability, upgradeability, etc.– System integrity,
• Sustainment– Supportability– System integrity
Modification/Upgrades: Repeat the Cycle
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
15Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Requirements AnalysisAnalyze missions & environments
Identify functional requirements
Define/refine performance & design constraint requirements
Functional Analysis/AllocationDecompose to lower level functions
Allocate performance & other limiting requirements to all functional levels
Define/refine functional interfaces
Define/refine/integrate functional architecture
SynthesisTransform architectures
Define alternatives system concepts, configuration items & system elements
Define/refine physical interfaces
Select preferred product & process solutions
System Analysis & Control
Requirements Loop
Design Loop
Verification
Phase dependent
Decision support data
System architecture
Specifications & baselines
Input
Customer needs/objectives/ requirements
Technology base
Outputs from prior phase
Program decision requirements
Requirements applied through specifications & standards
Output
Trade-off studies
Effectiveness analyses
Risk management
Configuration management
Interface Definition
Performance based progress measurements IMP IMS Technical reviews
Adapted from Mil-Std-499B (Draft)
17Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
OutlineOutline
Background• DoD Transformation
– 5000– JCIDS– Scope of SE
• Systems Engineering Revitalization Initiatives– USD (AT&L) Imperatives– SAF/AQ Initiatives– USD (AT&L) Initiatives
• Health of SE – DAI’s View (Jul 03)
18Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
USD (AT&L) ImperativesUSD (AT&L) Imperatives
• “Provide a context within which I can make decisions about individual programs.”
• “Achieve credibility and effectivness in the acquisition and logistics support processes.”
• “Help drive good systems engineering practice back into the way we do business.”
From Feb 04 OSD (AT&L) - NDIA SE Division Meeting
19Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
SAF/AQ SE RevitalizationSAF/AQ SE Revitalization
• SAF/AQ Dr. Sambur Memo, Apr 9, 2003– Focus attention on application of SE & elevate these disciplines
commensurate with cost & schedule– Develop SE performance incentives– Include status of SE in future program reviews– Identify key SE processes & practices in acquisition
documentation– Acquisition Strategy Panel briefings must address significant
SE areas• SAF/AQ Memo, Increment 2, Jan 7, 2004
– Intended to institutionalize key attributes of an acceptable SE approach
– Insert the appropriate language into the following acquisition documents
• Solicitations • Award Fee Plan/Incentive Fee Contract • Contracts
20Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
USD (AT&L) InitiativesUSD (AT&L) Initiatives
• AT&L SE Policy Memo, Feb 20, 2004– Effective immediately; included in next DoD 5000 revision– All programs, all ACATs shall apply a robust SE approach– SEP for MDA approval– Drive good SE back into the way we do business
• AT&L SEP Guidance Memo, Mar 30, 2004– Purpose of SEP is to lay out a plan to guide the technical
aspects of an acquisition program– Living document, tailored to the program; roadmap to support
program management– No prescribed format; address integration of technical aspects
to include:• The systems engineering processes to be applied in the program • The systems technical baseline approach• Event-driven timing, conduct, success criteria, and expected
products of technical reviews• The integration of systems engineering into the program’s IPTs
21Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
OutlineOutline
Background• DoD Transformation
– 5000– JCIDS– Scope of SE
• Systems Engineering Revitalization Initiatives– USD (AT&L) Imperatives– SAF/AQ Initiatives– USD (AT&L) Initiatives
• Health of SE – Briefing to AT&L (SE OPR)– Quick Study
22Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Health of SE TasksHealth of SE Tasks
• DoD 5000 & JCIDS reissued in May & June 03• Briefing in Jul 03• DAI personnel experiences
– Lack of execution discipline on programs– 18 problem areas cited– Common Denominators– List of Issues– Candidate emphasis areas listed
• DAI asked to provide supporting data• Quick Study Report/Briefing in Sep 03
23Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Common DenominatorsCommon Denominators
• Program Teams are incentivized by cost and/or schedule - not execution of disciplined SE practices
• Products and Processes are getting out of balance
• Inadequate depth in applied SE capability
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
24Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
IssuesIssues
Lack of SE Execution Incentives• Contracts reward cost and schedule
performance
Product and Process Imbalance• Emphasis on speedy delivery of product can
De-emphasize “processes”• Misapplication of spiral / evolutionary
development intent is used to justify program shortcomings – “fix it in the next spiral”
• Lack of true multifunctional activities in IPTs
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
25Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Issues (cont)Issues (cont)
Inadequate Depth in Applied SE Capability• Sound SE execution requires many trade
studies• Government and industry “de facto” rely on their
personnel to pass along “lessons learned”• Government and their contractors are losing
“critical mass” in some areas• Systems Engineering processes are adequately
defined BUT not followed, not understood, or are short circuited
• Advertised CMMI ratings do not assure effective program implementation
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
26Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Summary of Observed ProblemsSummary of Observed Problems
• Observed Problems - Approach• Three Categories of Problems
– Requirements Management (8)– Systems Engineering Process (7)– Engineering Management (6)
27Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Observed Problems - ApproachObserved Problems - Approach
• Based on analysis of many programs• Each problem area included
– Observed Problem/Issue• Statement of problem or issue• Program examples
– Impact• What happened because of problem
– Recommendations• What can be done to avoid the problem
• Focus was on systems engineering - recognized that systems engineering execution is not independent of overall program management
• Objective was to improve overall program performance
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
28Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Observed ProblemsObserved Problems
Requirements Management• Incomplete Definition of Requirements• Requirements Creep• Requirements Volatility• Lack of a Specification Tree• Incomplete/Weak Verification requirements• Late requirements Forced Into Software• Interface requirements and Interface
Management• Failure to Implement and Maintain Requirements
Traceability Tools© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
29Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Observed Problems (cont)Observed Problems (cont)
Requirements Management Example• Inadequate definition of requirements
– Statement of operational requirements– Statement of contractual performance requirements
• Problems– ORD too detailed; includes solution– SRD restates ORD– Contract spec paraphrases SRD; includes design solution– Requirements not refined at lower tiers; incomplete requirements to
subcontractors– Incomplete requirements analysis
• Impacts– Design & implementation cannot proceed effectively– Incomplete design; scrap & rework; expectations not met
• Recommendations– Enforce requirements reviews at Milestone B Review– Establish process to assure the SRD is complete & accurate– Reinforce requirement that IMP have well defined accomplishments
with entrance & exit criteria; SRR must be key event for “opening the gate” to proceed with design
– Develop templates, guides checklists to aid in review processes
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
30Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Observed Problems (cont)Observed Problems (cont)
Systems Engineering Process• Systems Engineering Process Not Defined on the
Program• Systems Engineering Process Defined But Not Applied• Lack of Flow Down of Systems Engineering Process
Requirements to Development Subcontractors• Lack of Robust Systems Engineering Applied to Top
Level System Design• Lack of Timely System Integration and Test (I&T)
Planning• Inadequate Planning for Obsolescence and
Sustainment• Design Incorporated into Performance Specifications
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
31Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Industry Standard
Corporate Process
Division Process
Program Process
Without a Tailored & Documented Systems Engineering Plan, Program Execution Suffers
Very Generic
Company Approach Top Level Applicable to all Products
Applicable to Product lines
Applicable to Specific Program
Well Documented
Rarely Documented
32Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Why a Program Specific SEPWhy a Program Specific SEP
• Directly tied to rest of program– Consistency across program plans &
documentation (SOW, WBS, EVMS, etc.)– Readily correlated to IMP & IMS for execution
• Establishes technical approach for stakeholders
• Includes program unique nuances– Established by program requirements– Provides for explanation of unique tailoring
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
33Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
Observed Problems (cont)Observed Problems (cont)
Engineering Management• Inadequate Schedules and Budget to
Accomplish Development Effort• Assumed Reuse Not Confirmed• Lack of Active Engineering Management of
Development Subcontractor• Integrated Master Plan (IMP) / Integrated
Master Schedule (IMS) Not Adequately Addressed and/or Not Followed on the Program
• No Single Technical focal Point (Chief Engineer)
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
34Ideas & Products Enabling Your Success!
Dayton Aerospace
ConclusionsConclusions
• Execution of sound SE processes is more important than ever
• Need forcing functions that drive execution of disciplined SE processes
Sound SE execution needs to be key ingredient in contract incentives
© 2004 Dayton Aerospace, Inc.
top related