Topic 1: Major Stakeholders Learner Outcome: Recognize the major stakeholders who support the requirements identification and approval process.
The first major stakeholders remain the individuals and organizations who identified the capability gap in the first place. These stakeholders are:Users: the warfighters, Combatant Commanders, and DoD agencies
Policy makers: the Joint Staff and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)
The first stakeholders must agree on a requirement and then approve pursuing that requirement. In light of today’s emphasis on joint operations and interoperability, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) emerges as the final arbiter of priorities and of alternative requirements.
Additional stakeholders enter into the picture:
The acquisition community must develop proposed materiel solutions.
Industry must build materiel solutions, support equipment, and support supplies such as ammunition and fuel.
The Business, Cost Estimating, and Financial Management (BCEFM) system must fund any development effort.
The logistics system must provide necessary support.
Systems Engineering must anticipate and solve development, production, and deployment problems.
The Test and Evaluation (T&E) community must test new weapons systems to help ensure their effectiveness before those new systems go into the field.
DoD approval authorities include the Acquisition Executive, the JROC, Functional Capabilities Boards (FCBs), the Joint Capabilities Board (JCB), and authorities within each Service and agency.
Topic 2: The Requirements Identification Process Learner Outcome: Identify the elements of the DoD requirements identification and approval processes to fill a capability gap.
The formal requirements process begins with a Capabilities-Based Assessment (CBA). Any DoD organization may initiate a CBA. Organizations may initiate CBAs to provide a joint examination of an operational concept proposed by a particular community; or to provide a broad examination of a functional area; or to provide answers on extremely compressed timelines.
The CBA identifies: 1) The capabilities and operational performance criteria required to execute missions successfully 2) The shortfalls in existing weapon systems to deliver those capabilities and the associated operational risks 3) The possible solution space for the capability shortfalls
Gaps in capabilities may be addressed as follows:
1) take no further action because the operational risk is at an acceptable level
2) a non-materiel approach such as changes to doctrine or organization
3) a materiel solution
4) some combination of approaches
CBA results go into either a DOTMLPF Change Recommendation (DCR) or an Initial Capabilities Document (ICD).
When the JROC approves an ICD, it is validating
1) the capabilities required to perform the mission as defined
2) the gap in capabilities
3) priorities and operational risks; and
4) the need to address the capability gaps
The Requirements Manager is the warfighters’ agent to be sure the JCIDS and all the other stakeholders see and understand a capability gap whether that gap comes from warfighter feedback or from a new national policy. Since there are many stakeholders, imagine all the things that can go wrong throughout a complicated and confusing process such as JCIDS. The Requirements Manager must be willing and able to face many challenges before DoD delivers an effective solution to the warfighter.
Perhaps the biggest problem the Requirements Manager faces is the need to develop a consensus within an individual Service and take that consensus through the JCIDS analysis and through the joint staff levels. Other action officers and Requirements
Lesson #3 – Identifying and Approving DoD Requirements Page 2 of 3
Managers will compete for higher prioritization and for funding. Experts with excellent qualifications and valid points of view will question the maturity of a concept as they imply the solution is not technically feasible or that someone is rushing the requirement ahead of more valid warfighters’ needs.
Everyone will want to change the requirements to reflect additional missions, priorities, or opportunities. As key people move in and out of their jobs, consensus can collapse if a new general or a new chief engineer rejects predecessor’s agreements, takes time to get up to speed, or brings a new point of view.
Translating the requirements to the managers in the acquisition community is a great challenge because different managers and different specialists have different training, different experience, different points of view, and different communications patterns. The requirements process needs extensive documentation and visualization because everyone needs to know and to agree on what the customer really needs. Throughout the various processes, the Requirements Manager must remain the voice of the warfighter.
The CBA identifies: 1) The capabilities and operational performance criteria required to execute missions successfully 2) The shortfalls in existing weapon systems to deliver those capabilities and the associated operational risks 3) The possible solution space for the capability shortfalls
Gaps in capabilities may be addressed as follows:
1) take no further action because the operational risk is at an acceptable level
2) a non-materiel approach such as changes to doctrine or organization
3) a materiel solution
4) some combination of approaches
CBA results go into either a DOTMLPF Change Recommendation (DCR) or an Initial Capabilities Document (ICD).
When the JROC approves an ICD, it is validating
1) the capabilities required to perform the mission as defined
2) the gap in capabilities
3) priorities and operational risks; and
4) the need to address the capability gaps
Topic 3: Requirements Manager Challenges Learner Outcome: Identify the challenges for Requirements Managers in guiding a requirement through the Capabilities-Based Planning (CBP) Requirements Process.
The Requirements Manager is the warfighters’ agent to be sure the JCIDS and all the other stakeholders see and understand a capability gap whether that gap comes from warfighter feedback or from a new national policy. Since there are many stakeholders, imagine all the things that can go wrong throughout a complicated and confusing process such as JCIDS. The Requirements Manager must be willing and able to face many challenges before DoD delivers an effective solution to the warfighter.
Perhaps the biggest problem the Requirements Manager faces is the need to develop a consensus within an individual Service and take that consensus through the JCIDS analysis and through the joint staff levels. Other action officers and Requirements
Lesson #3 – Identifying and Approving DoD Requirements Page 2 of 3
Managers will compete for higher prioritization and for funding. Experts with excellent qualifications and valid points of view will question the maturity of a concept as they imply the solution is not technically feasible or that someone is rushing the requirement ahead of more valid warfighters’ needs.
Everyone will want to change the requirements to reflect additional missions, priorities, or opportunities. As key people move in and out of their jobs, consensus can collapse if a new general or a new chief engineer rejects predecessor’s agreements, takes time to get up to speed, or brings a new point of view.
Translating the requirements to the managers in the acquisition community is a great challenge because different managers and different specialists have different training, different experience, different points of view, and different communications patterns. The requirements process needs extensive documentation and visualization because everyone needs to know and to agree on what the customer really needs. Throughout the various processes, the Requirements Manager must remain the voice of the warfighter.
No comments:
Post a Comment