Conceptual Framework

1
UNCLASSIFIED
Office of the Secretary of Defense Acquisition,
Technology Logistics Defense Research
Engineering Plans Program Office
Conceptual Framework for Military Capability
Development
Mike Knollmann ADUSD (Joint Coalition Ops
Support) Pentagon Rm 3E819 (703)
693-0462 michael.knollmann_at_osd.mil
UNCLASSIFIED
2
Defense Capabilities EnterpriseDiversified
Force Generation Roles, Diversified Force
Employment Needs
Organize, Train Equip
Operationally Employ
and increasingly, complex operational partners
NGB, inter-agency, coalition, NGO
3
Quadrennial Defense Review Purpose
The QDR will assess the threats and challenges
the nation faces and re-balance DoDs strategies,
capabilities and forces to address todays
conflicts and tomorrows threats.

• The QDR is one of the principal means by which
  the tenets of the National Defense Strategy are
  translated into potentially new policies,
  capabilities and initiatives.
• The QDR will set a long-term course for DoD to
  follow and will provide a strategic framework for
  DoDs annual program, force development, force
  management, and corporate support mechanisms.
• Other strategic reviews, as well as day-to-day
  decisions will be carried out while the QDR is
  underway and will inform its deliberations.
• Previous QDRs were conducted in 1997, 2001, and
  2006.

4
Strategic Environment For The QDR
The strategic environment we face is complex and
the security challenges both current and those
on the horizon are wide ranging. The global
economic downturn adds to the complexity.

• Key security challenges include violent extremist
  movements, the spread of weapons of mass
  destruction, rising powers with sophisticated
  weapons, failed or failing states, and increasing
  encroachment across the global commons (air, sea,
  space, cyberspace).
• U.S. strategy must also increasingly account for
  a series of powerful trends that are reshaping
  the international landscape and will dramatically
  complicate the exercise of American statecraft
  and overseas relations.
• In addition to the current global economic
  downturn, these trends include climate change,
  cultural and demographic shifts, increasing
  scarcity of resources and the spread of
  destabilizing technologies.
• The U.S. must prevail in current conflicts while
  preparing for future contingencies.
• The 2010 QDR will address these emerging
  challenges and explore ways to improve the
  balance of efforts and resources between
• Trying to prevail in current conflicts and
  preparing for future contingencies, and
• Institutionalizing capabilities such as
  counterinsurgency and foreign military assistance
  and maintaining the United States existing
  conventional and strategic technological edge
  against other military forces.

5
Specific Areas Of Emphasis For This QDR

• Further institutionalizing irregular warfare and
  civil support abroad capabilities and capacities,
  to include building partnership capacity,
• Addressing threats posed from the use of advanced
  technology and WMD,
• Global Force Posture,
• Strengthening DoD support to civilian-led
  operations and activities, and
• Managing the Departments internal business
  processes to improve their efficiency and
  effectiveness.

6
The QDR Process
Embraces a whole of government approach. As
such, DoD will consult with other U.S. Government
departments and agencies and appropriate
Congressional committees.

• The QDR will be informed by similar reviews being
  conducted by the Department of Homeland Security
  (Quadrennial Homeland Security Review), the
  Director of National Intelligence (Quadrennial
  Intelligence Community Review), and incorporate
  guidance from relevant National Security Council
  (NSC) reviews.
• In addition, a series of separate
  congressionally-directed reviews of the
  Departments nuclear, space and missile defense
  postures will be closely coordinated with the
  QDR, but still provide separate reports to
  Congress.
• The 2010 QDR process will also include
  consultation mechanisms with key allies and
  partners. The Secretary of Defense has
  established a governance structure to manage the
  coordination of the QDR.
• The QDR will be led by the Office of the
  Secretary of Defense and Joint Staff. OSD and
  Joint Staff leadership will work closely with
  representatives from the Military Services and
  Combatant Commands and across OSD components.
• Combatant Commanders and Service Chiefs will
  engage often in helping to shape issues and frame
  decisions for the review.

7
Aligning the Domains Defense Engine for
Capabilities
All three domains must be aligned engaged to
deliver capabilities
Military Needs Validation Operations
Acquisition Technology, Procurement, Logistics
Resources Plans, Programs, Budgeting

• The challenge for Joint Capabilities and their
  Combatant Commander customers
• They exist in the authority domain of Military
  Needs Operations
• Joint force needs are predominantly expressed
  through CJCS
• Only US Special Operations Command has force
  development acquisition authorities
• They rely on Services for preponderance of force
  capabilities
• Force Integration / Force Provider services
  performed by USJFCOM
• USJFCOM translates joint force needs into force
  fill requirements for Services
• They rely on Services for HQ resources through
  legacy Executive Agency provisions
• They have limited manpower to participate in
  needs, acquisition funding processes

8
Needs to Solutions Processes Roles
PPBESProgram Budget Process
Acquisition Solutions Process

• Consult with needs authorities in development of
  acqusition solutions
• Acquire material solutions based on validated
  needs and budget-based programming
• Deliver resources (acquisition products) for
  allocation to joint/combatant commanders

Solution Roles
USD (ATL)/DAE Service Secretaries/SAEs OSD
(ATL) Staff Service Secretariat Staffs
Systems/Materiel Commands Military
Agencies USSOCOM special authorities
Policy Framework
9
Joint Capability Development Strategy Framing
Remedies

• Identifying Military Requirements
• Analyze capability gaps
• Lessons Learned / Warfighting Analyses
• Characterize improvements What is really
  required?
• Experimentwhat DOTMLPF elements are needed?
• Define in actionable terms
• Specify DOTMLPF elements or options

Understand DoD roles Respect leverage
authorities Needs?Requirements?Solutions

• Framing the Solution Set
• Headquarters enhancement
• Engage Executive Agency (military Service)?
• Specific Component Force Development
• Specify Service partnership / component roles
• Joint Force Capability Gap
• Pursue Functional CoCom partnerships

• Developing Specific Strategies
• Address key gap-closing capability segments
• Forge partnerships with strategy development
• Key element of resourcing transition
• Stipulate timeline and phasing of deliverables
• Cite operational imperative for timelines

Use diversity of tools Employ gapfillers Remain
flexible
10
Restructure Capabilities Based Analyses (CBAs)
Current Process
Done
Change DOTmLPF
ICD CPD CDD
CBA
Risk OK
JROC Approve
Done
Validate Gap need for materiel solution

• Identify Gaps
• Assess Non-materiel Solutions
• Assess Risks (No Action)

Additional Analysis
Streamline analysis and focus JROC decisions
11
Military Needs/Operations DomainJCIDS Joint
Operational Needs Process Overview
JCIDS Flow For Materiel Solutions
JROC Interest
FCB Review
Joint Needs Sponsor Review
JROC (or JCB) Validation Decision
Sponsor
JCIDS Analysis
Needs Validation Gatekeeper (JS J-8)
ACAT I/IA Programs ACAT II Programs for joint
capabilities
ICD CPD CDD
JROC Integration
Sponsor Validation and Approval
KMDS2 Knowledge Management Support Tool (SIPRNET)
JPD Decision
Acquisition Excecutive
?ACAT II Programs requiring joint certification
Independent
All other acquisition program proposals
12
Defining Defense Experimentation
JCIDS
Acquisition Process
User Needs
Acquisition/Technology Development Processes
A
B
C
Operations Support
Production Deployment
Materiel Solution Analysis
Engineering Manuf Development
Joint Concepts
Capabilities - Based Assessment
Strategic Guidance
ICD
Technology Development
CDD
CPD
OS
MDD
COCOM
OSD/JCS
hypothesis formulation, rigorous analytical
assessment
Materiel Solutions
EXPERIMENTATION
Prototyping Test Evaluation
Demonstration
Data Studies Collection
Analyses
CGA Conceptual DOT_LPF
Solution Validation Exploration
Framework Refinement
Discovery Definition (Field Trials)
TTI, JCTDs, JTE, CWID, CWP, et al
JCOA, JWAC, JAWP, et al
RRTO

• Influence of policy, e.g. Guidance for Force
  Development
• Developmental doctrine Tactics, Training
  Procedures
• Innovative employment of existing capabilities

13
ST Linkage to Acquisition Management System
B
A
C
IOC
FOC
Engineering Manufacturing Development
Operations Support
Production Deployment
Materiel Solution Analysis
Technology Development
FRP Decision Review
Materiel Development Decision

Post CDR Assessment

Post PDR Assessment
(1)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(3)
Systems ST
Warfighting Needs RD Objectives
MDA DECISION
oversight panel
Options (1) Concepts for new systems/upgrade
systems out of production. (2) Insert into
ongoing systems development, or complete
development. (3) Upgrade system in
production/fielded systems or produce mature
capability (4) Use new technology for
demilitarization/disposal
oversight panel
Advanced Technology Development

• Warfighting Experiments
• Lab/field demos/RRT
• ATD
• JCTD
• JTE

Tech Base

• Basic Research
• Applied Research

14
Development Model for Acquisition Solutions

• Transition to Procurement Sustainment
• Joint Training
• Readiness Suitability Confirmation
• Test Evaluation
• Military assessment of utility
• Functional Validation Tailored Form/Fit/Function
• DOTMLPF construct development and confirmation
• Demonstration
• Technical Concept Design Development
• Prototyping
• Alternatives Development Assessment
• Experimentation
• Red Teaming Analysis
• Conceptualization
• Needs identification/lessons learned/assessment
• Tech push exploitation

more Maturity of Operational
Concept and Technology less
15
Range of Current Technology Transition Programs
Research Engineering
Science Technology
6.3
6.1
6.2
6.4
6.5
6.7
Proc
OM
Initial Product/ Process Capability
Product/Process Development
Product/Process Insertion
Product/Process Improvement Sustainment

Service ST, DTRA and DARPA Programs

JRAC / Svc Rapid Acquisition Pgms
CWID (US)
SBIR Phase I
SBIR Phase II
SBIR Phase III
JWP
CoCom Initiative Fund
CWP/C2IP
COCOM /Joint/Coalition focused Demo 1-4 yrs
ACTDs/JCTDs
USSOCOM/USTRANSCOM RD and Acquisition
USJFCOM JCDE / DoD Joint Experimentation Program
6-12 mos fielding
QRSP Quick Reaction Fund/ RRF RRTO / JIEDDO
Acquisition On Ramp Test to Procure Tech
Refresh
Defense Acquisition Challenge
Service, SOCOM Nominated Test to procure
Foreign Comparative Testing
Congressionally Directed DOD Lab Tech Push
Tech Transition Initiative
JTE
JFIIT/JSIC
Independent Research Development
Tech Transfer Initiative
Manufacturing Technology
Title III of the Defense Production Act
16
Capability Development Strategy Template
Example
A coherent strategy sets bar for solution
providers expectations for joint customers
DEFINING EXPLORING PILOTING PROTOYPING
INTEGRATING PRODUCING FIELDING
Needs identification
Needs analyses
DCR Concept definition
Quick fixes
Leap-ahead tech insertion
Backbone effort schedule driver
International partnerships
COTS insertion
Integrated testing
Shortfall verification
Point of Departure Capability Gap Assessment
Output Fielded Capability
17
UNCLASSIFIED
Office of the Secretary of Defense Acquisition,
Technology Logistics Defense Research
Engineering Plans Program Office
Conceptual Framework for Military Capability
Development
UNCLASSIFIED
18
Technology Readiness Levels
System Test, Flight and Operations
System/Subsystem Development
Technology Demonstration
Technology Development Research
to Prove Feasibility Basic
Technology Research
9 Actual system flight proven through
successful mission operations 8 Actual system
completed and flight qualified through test and
demonstration 7 System prototype demonstration
in an operational environment 6 System/subsystem
model or prototype demonstration in a relevant
environment 5 Component and/or breadboard
validation in relevant environment 4 Component
and/or breadboard validation in laboratory
environment 3 Analytical and experimental
critical function and/or characteristic
proof-of-concept 2 Technology concept and/or
application formulated 1 Basic principles
observed and reported
FRP
MSC
MSB
MSA