CDM Issues and Relationships to SE and Logistics Workshop & Way Forward? Bonnie Johnson Cynthia Hauer

CDM Issues and Relationshipsto SE and Logistics

Workshop & Way Forward?

Bonnie JohnsonCynthia Hauer

Objective

• To examine and understand our CM and DM roles and responsibilities with and to SE and LOG

• To look at how they self-assessed, and see if we can learn from that

• To take a proactive approach in defining our own issues, and moving forward in a purposeful way to meet the challenges they have thrown down, to our discipline/community

Systems Engineering Issues Issue circa 2006 2010 updateKey SE practices known to be effective are not consistently applied across all phases of the program life cycle

Institutionalization of practices has shown value but adoption is spottyHow proficiency can be measured is problematic

Insufficient SE is applied early in the life cycle, compromising the foundation for initial requirements and architecture development.

Improving in complex systems Policy updates imply SE engagement, but are not explicit in how or anecdotal to when

Requirements are not always well-managed, including an effective translation from capability statements into executable requirements to achieve successful acquisition programs.

Requirements are believed to be improved, but not measured. Variability in approaches to requirements definition, validation, and consolidation continue

Quality and Quality of SE is insufficient to meet demands of the government and the defense industry

Resource issues persist, in government and industry.Shortages in leadership, domain, architects, systems engineers …Initiatives in acquisition, workforce, STEM, and cross training are failed.

Collaborative environments including SE tools are inadequate to effectively execute SE at the joint capability, system of systems (SoS), and system levels.

State of the practice techniques are not widely utilized Multiple tools are available but little guidance on preferences exists Emphasis on SoS seems to have diminished.

Source: NDIA SE Committee Study Circa 2010

Specifics • Increasingly urgent demands of the warfighter require effective capabilities be

fielded more rapidly than the conventional acquisition processes and development methodologies allow.

• Quantity and quality of systems engineering expertise is insufficient to meet the demands of the government and the defense industry.

• Systems engineering practices known to be effective are not consistently applied or properly resourced to enable early system definition.

Decision makers to not have the right information at the right time to support informed and proactive decision-making that ensures effective and efficient program planning, management, and execution.

Lack of technical authority can impact the integrity of developed systems and result in cost/schedule/system performance impacts as the technical solution is iterated and reworked in later stages of the development.

These issues are direct correlations and connections for CM and DM.They are mandates for CM and DM.

Recommendations on the Way Forward

• Incorporate into DoD guidance the preference for use of outcome-based partnerships at all levels, components, subsystems, systems – to improve availability and reduce support costs.

• Capitalize on commercial supply chains for all DoD commodities/repairables, forecasting, ordering, storage, and distribution.

• Achieve commercial best practice distribution performance through partnering with industry to leverage and impact the commercial infrastructure.

• Competitively source commercially provided theater opening and in-theater Logistics support

• Convert existing Logistics information systems to commercial managed services model(s).

Their Recommendations

• Develop internal risk-driven guidance …– Issues to be addressed are included – Each issue has multiple discussion points – There is a recommendation for each of those

discussion points which refers and maps to each issue

• Their white paper has been distributed throughout the membership of the SE NDIA committee and beyond.

Logistics – Community Assessment & Findings

• Life cycle product support and outcome based partnerships are urgently needed. • Management of commodities by suppliers and assigning a single owner for the

end to end supply chain system is critical • Managing assets and the supporting infrastructure requires rapid, global mobility

and distribution capability and infrastructure. • Competitively sourced private sector theater services to meet the technical and

financial challenge of having more contractor support personnel in theater than there are uniformed personnel.

• Logistics information systems are hardcoding Cold War business rules and processes into modern logistics. DoD is still at least 10 years away from fielding modern supply chain systems which turn data into information supporting effective decision-making and enabling collaborative tools in an adaptive environment.

• Needed changes above require responsible governance to reduce and recast logistics costs.

Source: Modernizing Defense LogisticsPerformance Based Logistics – ImplicationsFor Availability, Public-Private Partnerships, and Cost Savings – Dr. William Bajusz

What are we seeing, here?

• These two communities have done a self-assessment, and they have developed conclusions and a way forward for themselves.

• It’s obvious that they are pointing to connections, causes, and issues where CM and DM are involved and could be game-changers.

• We won’t see this sort of self-assessment, sharing, or appeals from the commercial sector. – Why? Because their processes are part of their competitive

edge – and they don’t want to share them.• What is the lesson we learn from this?

And what can we do about that?

• Self-assess and analyze • Define issues and discussion points• Turn to our community to begin

communication and consistency• Develop roadmaps to meet issues in SE and

LOG– Become relevant, focused, and clear in our

communication.

What are our CM and DM challenges, internal to our discipline?

• Inconsistent terms & concepts? • Our belief that we are a “tailorable”

implementation?• Splits between the SW CM and the HW CM

communities that undermine our communication and effectiveness?

• Our heritage for placing blame externally? • Let’s take a look at some of our key processes.

Process Development and Control

• Elements:– Developing procedures and processes– Developing best practices– Institutionalizing to the enterprise level– Roles and Relationships with the CIO– Internal and external interfaces– Access and management of access issues– CM and DM functions/interfaces– Cost Issues (budgets and schedules)– Implementation scheduling and planning– Staffing and utilizing the resources available– Training to expand and back-fill


• Questions to Answer:– What should the new enterprise CDM environment really look

like?– How are we going to sell that and integrate it into our current

business systems?– How can we change the existing paradigms?– How are we going to educate people when the paradigm shifts?– How can we train new people to work within the new paradigm?– How will the new CDM environment interface with SE and Logistics

functions and organizations, and morph into information management?

– How can CDM facilitate the industry initiatives?


• Outputs:– New Best Practices for CDM, based on Technology

Evolution to E-Commerce/E-Business realities– Updated CDM philosophy which creates SE and

Logistics process integration

Work Instructions

• Elements:– Good ones and bad ones– Requirements mapping – Content– Flow– Inter-relationships– Integration– Training

Work Instructions

• Elements (Continued):– Staffing– Budgets– Implementation– Institutionalization– Prototyping– Pilot Programs– Cross-pollenization

Work Instructions

• Questions to answer:– How do we merge commercial and government

philosophies into a new paradigm that satisfies both parties and is mutually advantageous?

– Could we use an option concept for the enterprise?

– How do we find/select an opportunity for a pilot program or validation opportunity?

– How do we distribute the information to the CDM, SE and Log professional communities?

Work Instructions

• Outputs:– A scalable enterprise model applicable to all

sectors of practice.– This models become a part of curricula for CDM,

SE and Log

CDM, SE, Log and International Commerce Challenges

• Elements:– Humanities Issues

• Cultural• Language• Business ethics• Legal• Import/export• Intellectual property• Customs (technology transfer)• Costs of customs• Format standardization


• Questions to answer:– What are the conventions for moving items and

data in and out of trading partner countries?– What are the format and measurement exchange

issues?• If there are none, how do we maneuver in disparate

environments?


• Outputs:– New CDMStandard to be internationally

recognized and used as the standard for performing data management tasks

– A templates for an International CDM, SE and Log plan

Corporate Data Bank and the Role of CDM, SE and LOG

• Elements:– Establishing CDM, SE, and LOG content and

objectives– Defining the requirements for same– Developing processes and procedures for

integration and information sharing– Server issues– Access issues– Operation and control


• Elements (Continued):– Storage and backup– CDM, SE and LOG issues/functions– Disaster Recovery– Planning– Independent management of corporate hardware

and software– Training


• Questions to answer:– How do we implement the new standards in our

corporate environments.– How do we sell the new paradigm to our management?– How can the new paradigm enhance and benefit other

corporate functional entities?– How are we going to wrestle away functions from IT

and other corporate entities that are not consistent with the new way of doing business in CDM, SE and LOG?


• Outputs:– Cost analysis to support the paradigm shift and

provide rationale and incentive to management to implement the new paradigm

– Support for the Pilot program to justify staffing, budgets and implementation of a new way of doing business

– Plan for phased implementation, with metrics and milestones for visibility and accountability.

ID and Management of Lifecycle Data by Phase/Activity

• Elements:– Identification– Definition– Scheduling– Value-added functions– Activity-based management– Proactive monitoring– Proposal support activities– Anticipating follow-on work– Sustainment issues


• Elements (Continued):– Operational phases– Dispositioning– Commissioning– Decommissioning– Archival (internal and external)– Records Management– Data retrieval– Metadata development


• Questions to answer:– How do we deal with Maintenance and follow-on

contracts?– How do we map lifecycle phases to lifecycle

activities?– What other functional entities are there to be

discovered and integrated?


• Outputs:– Clear, concise and valid requirements for acquiring, providing, and

managing data in the integrated CDM, SE and LOG environment– Recommendations and requirements for data tracking systems

and tools– Common, defined activity base for the entire lifecycle of products

and services• Common set of activities from the RFP generation to the natural death of

the product or service

– A pathway for trading partners from “phases” to lifecycle activities• Mapping of phases to activities and establishment of a common

vocabulary

Summary

• When we separate our respective functions, we are fighting for survival.

• When we integrate, we are unbeatable. • We can drive the remaining organization

functions in the right direction by conquering our three related functions

• And we create power and success by doing that• Questions?

Documents

CDM Issues and Relationships to SE and Logistics Workshop & Way Forward? Bonnie Johnson Cynthia Hauer