Defense Acquisition Reform Task Force Sub-Panel: Acquisition Workforce

1
Building C4ISR Capabilities in a Dynamic
Environment
2
MISSION

• Explore innovative ways to improve DoD C4ISR
  system design and acquisition processes so that
  we can better transform advances in information
  technology into operational capabilities.

3
Context and Expectations

• The workshop has been divided into three panels
• Building C4ISR Capabilities in a Dynamic
  Environment
• Design and Development Risk Management
• Transition
• Each panel has been directed to
• Formulate Problem Statement
• Identify Impediments, Constraints and
  Opportunities
• Provide Recommendations for Incremental
  Improvements
• Identify venue for follow-up

4
Nature of the Problem (1 or 3)

• There are several factors that contribute to the
  dynamic environment in which future C3I
  systems-of-systems will be acquired
• Threat
• The New World Disorder is characterized by
• Extreme uncertainty about future adversaries,
  areas of operation
• The need to coordinate, interoperate with
  different organizations (e.g., NGOs, law
  enforcement agencies)
• Concepts of operations
• There is a much greater emphasis being placed on
  joint and combined operations
• Politically, it is important to conduct
  operations in the context of ad hoc coalitions of
  the willing
• Commercial information technology
• DoD use is increasing
• This technology is characterized by an 18 month
  time scale

5
Nature of the Problem (2 of 3)

• The C4ISR acquisition problem is characterized by
  several curses of dimensionality
• Systems -- There are an extraordinary number of
  systems that must work together effectively, even
  in the limited case of a single Service (see next
  vugraph)

6
Scope of InteroperabilityABCS Exemplar
ASAS Interop. Adv.Quickfix-army-U AMS-army-00 ARL
-army-U ATCAE-army-97 CTS/CTAPS-army-97 DAI-army-9
7 Enhan.Trackwolf-army-U EPDS-army-97 ETRAC-army-U
ETUT-army-97 GBCS-army-U Guardrail-army-97 IEWCS-
army-U IPF-army-97 MIES-army-97 MITT-army-97 NGIC-
army-U NPIC-army-U NSA-army-97 SSP/S-army-97 TEAMM
ATE-army-97 TES-army-97 THMT-army-97 TrafficJam-ar
my-97 Trailblazer-army-97 TRRIP-army-U UAV
GCS-army-97 UAV MPCS-army-97 CARS/TRIGS-joint-97 I
AC-joint-97 JMCIS-joint-97 JStarsCGS-joint-97 NIPS
-joint-97 TBMCS-joint-U TCAC-joint-97 PASS-K-allie
d-U RAPIDE-allied-97
FAAD C2 Interop. LLAPI-allied-95 GBS
Radar-army-94 HIMAD-army-94 LSDIS
Radar-army-97 TIBS-army-U AWACS-joint-93 Hawkeye-j
oint-93
GCCS-A Interop. AIBS-army-96 FAISA-army-97 TARSTAT
-army-97-98 AMSAA-joint-96 APC-joint-96 ASAS-joint
-97 ATCOM-joint-96 AWDS-joint-97 CASCOM-joint-96 C
TAPS/TBMCS-joint-97 DAMO-ODR-joint-96 DES-joint-96
DLA/ICIS-joint-96 GCCS/GSORTS-joint-98 GCCS/GSRDI
-joint-98 GCCS/JOPES-joint-98 IOC-joint-96 ISC-P-j
oint-96 JTAV-joint-97 LOGSA-joint-96 MCS-joint-96
PERSCOM-joint-96 RAMS-joint-96 REQVAL-joint-96 SAM
AS-joint-96 TAV-joint-96
IMETS Interop. FAST-Joint- JSTARS
CGS-joint- MITT-Joint-
MCS Interop. LFCS-army-97 CTAPS-joint-97 JMCIS-joi
nt-98 JStarsGCS-joint-98 TCO-joint-98 AUSTACCS-all
ied-98 HEROS-allied-96 LFCCIS-allied-97 QIFS-allie
d-98 SIACCON-allied-98 SICF-allied-96
GCCS-A
DTSS
AFATDS Interop. ATHS-army-97 BCS-army-97 FDS-army-
97 Firefinder--army-97 FIST DMD-army-97 FOCC-army-
97 FOS-army-98 IDM-army-99 IFSAS-army-97 LtacFire-
army-97 MBC-army-97 MDS-army-97 MFCS-army-99 MMS-a
rmy-97 UAV/TS/00-army-U AFATDS-joint-99
(MC) CTAPS/TBMCS-joint-98 IFSAS-joint-97
(MC) JStars/GCS-joint-97 TacFire-01-joint-U
(MC) ADLER-allied-98 ATLAS-allied-98 BATES-allied-
98
MCS
FAAD C2
IMETS
ASAS
CSSCS
AFATDS
FBCB2
IMETS Interop. GPS-army- MMS-army- UAV-army- JSTAR
S CGS-joint-
FBCBS Interop. BCIS-army-U KIOWA-army-U LVRS-army-
U M1A2 SEP-army-U M2A2-army-U MICAD-U NBCRS-army-
U Paladin-AFCS PLGR-army-97 LandWarrior-army-U
CSSCS Interop. GCCS/A-army-99 SAMS/2-army-97 SARSS
/1-army-97 SARSS/2A/D-army-98 SIDPERS/2.75-army-97
SIDPERS-3-army-98 SPBS/R-army-97 TAMMIS-army-98 U
LLS/S4-army-98
7
Nature of the Problem (3 of 3)

• The C4ISR acquisition problem is characterized by
  several curses of dimensionality
• Systems -- There are an extraordinary number of
  systems that must work together effectively, even
  in the limited case of a single Service
• Organizations -- There are many organizations
  that have been created to deal with the key issue
  of interoperability (see next vugraph)

8
(No Transcript)
9
Basic Objective

• Achieving effective, affordable C4ISR systems to
  accommodate
• Diverse uncertain threats
• New and evolving ops concepts
• Our Inability to fully specify requirements
  up-front
• Rapidly advancing technology
• Effective necessary functionality,
  interoperable (w/i services, joint, coalition),
  secure, adaptable, scalable, evolvable ...

10
Selected Process Issues

• There is a need to enhance rapid insertion of
  evolving technology to ensure that fielded
  systems are not obsolete
• Steps are required to co-evolve DOTLMP,
  requirements, capability, technology (while being
  sensitive to the issues of value and cost)
• The current acquisition process is oriented
  toward weapons systems vice software/IT systems
• Efforts must be made to implement the right
  Industry/Government partnership
• We tend to deal with legacy systems as the least
  common denominator -- we need to learn how to
  migrate legacy systems
• The Architecture Framework contains no process
  description -- we need implementation guidance
• There is no process to evaluate and review
  architectures (e.g., no sign off process) -- how
  does it fit in the acquisition process?
• Need a support environment that makes it easier
  to build an interoperable system than a
  non-interoperable one

11
Additional Selected Issues

• Systems are not interoperable and they must be to
  act as an effective, robust system-of-systems
• Current incentives/rewards in acquisition are
  inadequate to promote prudent risk-taking

12
Provocative Thoughts (Light Bulbs) (1 of 2)

• Several steps must be taken to ensure that
  systems (hardware, software, people) are robust
• Software error recovery
• Robust testing - - scale of test (Note Numbers
  of LRIP systems are too limited to support)
  alpha and beta testing
• Redundancy - diverse solutions -- h/w, s/w,
  people
• Contingency planning -- h/w, s/w, people
• Consumers Union/Underwriters Laboratory for COTS
• Red teaming

13
Provocative Thoughts (Light Bulbs) (2 of 2)

• Revise the Architecture Framework to reflect
  changes in the 5000 series
• ASD C3I should explicitly examine how to execute
  spiral/helical development within the
  reassessment of the Architecture Framework
• Need a champion
• Support coalition interoperability
  experimentation
• Support establishment of a joint rapid
  acquisition program element -- leverage success
  of current Warfighters Rapid Acquisition Program
  (WRAP)

14
Provocative Thoughts (Light Bulbs) (2 of 3)

• Provide a rich and usable toolset for building
  interoperable systems (late addition by Jeremy
  Kaplan)
• GCCS COE
• Distributed Joint Test Bed
• JTA compliancy listed
• Boilerplate language for acquiring interoperable
  systems
• Mechanisms for receiving joint warfighter
  feedback

15
A Framework for FormulatingRecommendations
3
16
Preliminary Recommendations (1 of 2)

• Cultural Change
• Implement CIO role as Bully Pulpit
• Organizational Change
• Zero base interoperability organizations
• Vision/Policy
• Rationalize cross-Service operational visions
• C3I, AT develop and cosign a policy paper on
  spiral/helical development and its relationship
  to new 5000 directive - emphasis on co-evolution
  and experimentation across DOTLMSP
• Processes
• ASD C3I should explicitly re-examine the
  Architecture Framework within a spiral/helical
  development environment

17
Preliminary Recommendations (2 of 2)

• Processes (Concluded)
• Re-assess the Architecture Framework to ensure
  the inclusion of necessary view to include
  security and robustness/error recovery
• Resources
• Provide for joint funding resources to support
  joint/coalition activities - not a service take
  away
• Establish a joint rapid acquisition PE
• Tools/Experimentation ( People)
• Extend CTSF model for joint use - collective
  environment/training
• Develop and disseminate Best Practices for
  Experimentation
• Products
• Additional views of the Architecture are needed
  (e.g., security, error recovery)

18
Way Forward

• To transform the preliminary recommendations into
  final recommendations, the panel will
• Amplify, reassess the recommendations
• Sort the recommendations (e.g., near-term vs
  longer term)
• Vet them with members of the acquisition
  community
• For those recommendations that are of interest,
  the panel will work with the OSD(C3I) staff to
  help in their implementation

19
Backup Material
20
Candidate Recommendations

• Cultural - joint/coalition mindset, incentives,
  leadership/champions
• Organization - champions, streamline interop orgs
  - zero base
• People - collective training - ops and
  acquisition
• Vision/Policy - rationalize cross-service visions
• Processes - partnerships w/o borders,
  spiral/helical development, architectural views
  framework - how to? Synchronization events,
  portfolio mgmt
• Resources - joint rapid acquisition PE,
  incentives
• Tools/Experiments - coalition (in test bed),
  purple CTSF, Experimentation Best Practice
• Products - Architectural Views (e.g., security,
  error recovery)

21
Acquiring Systems-of-Systems -- Strawman Major
Issues (1 of 3)

• Evolutionary Acquisition
• Barriers to implementation e.g.,
• Reaction of Congress
• Concerns of TE Community
• Existing DoD policy, guidance
• Tools to support implementation
• CTSF experience (US Army)
• Steps to facilitate assimilation of commercial
  products (with their 18 month characteristic time
  cycle)
• Requirements-Acquisition-Operations Relationship
• What is the appropriate relationship between the
  two processes?
• How does one formally capture the requirements
  insights that emerge during an evolutionary
  acquisition?

22
Selected References

• Annette Krygiel, Behind the Wizards Curtain,
  NDU and DoD CCRP, July 1999
• Stuart Starr, Modeling Simulation to Support
  The Acquisition Process, Chapter 9 of Military
  Modeling for Decision Making, MORS, 1997
• Rapid Development, Microsoft
• Institutionalizing the Good Idea CTSF, Grasso
• Spiral Development Experience, Principles and
  Refinement, Barry Boehm

23
Proposed Concept of Operations

• Identify candidate major issues (building on a
  strawman set)
• Discuss and rank order the major issues
• For a selected set of high priority major issues,
  formulate preliminary
• Findings
• Recommendations
• Formulate a process for follow-on activities
  e.g.,
• Identify relevant references
• Clarify the nature of the problem
• Identify additional organizations to be
  represented on the team
• Identify organizations to visit
• Establish a schedule for future meetings

24
Acquiring Systems-of-Systems -- Strawman Major
Issues (2 of 3)

• Confederations of Allied/Coalition
  Systems-of-Systems
• What steps can be taken to ensure that US and
  allied/coalition acquisitions are
• Interoperable?
• Mutually reinforcing?
• Architectures
• To what extent can families of architectures
  (e.g., operational, system, technical) help us
  acquire systems-of-systems more effectively and
  efficiently?
• What is the state-of-the-art in architecture
  development and application?
• Simulation Based Acquisition
• Applicability to C3I acquisitions?
• Availability of supporting tools, data, knowledge

25
Acquiring Systems-of-Systems -- Strawman Major
Issues (3 of 3)

• Education Training
• How can we educate and train Program Managers on
  the processes that must be performed to acquire
  systems-of-systems?
• How can we educate and train the operators who
  will man the systems-of-systems (particularly as
  CONOPS evolve to respond to the evolving
  system-of-systems)?

26
Solution Mechanisms

• Experimentation
• Architectures
• Policy
• Organization

27
Problem/Solution Matrix
28
Todays Timeline

• 900 - 915 Reformulate Problem Statement
• 915 - 1000 Lessons Learned/Roadblocks/Constraint
  s
• 1000 - 1045 Light Bulbs
• 1045 - 1130 Synthesis
• 1130 - 1145 Revisit Problem Statement
• 1145 - 1200 Way Forward

29
Where Are We Now?
Industry
MAJCOMS
Labs
ESC (CUBE)
Hurlburt (TIC)
Academia
Ad hoc
Ad hoc
Joint Ops Field
JBC/JED/USACOM
Ft. Hood CTSF
Force-Level Service Integration
System Fielding
SPAWAR C4ISR-SIE
Sea Based BL
Technical Integration- Development
DARPA