Systems Engineering Tools@MITRE

Volume 4 - Number 1 March 2006

Systems Engineering ToolsMITREMITRE applies a variety of systems engineering tools to the work it does Systems

engineering tools can aid in modeling and managing enterprise architec-tures understanding complex systems and assessing and managing risk to name a few areas There are many tools out there some are commer-

cial products that can be applied to a broad range of jobs while others are home grown to fit the needs of a specific task or program With all the

choices you may have difficulty selecting a tool that meets your needs This issue highlights some of the tools that various Centers use Yoursquoll find articles that

offer insight into the toolsrsquo ease of use and effectiveness as well as the value these tools add to the programs in which they are employed

Contents

Systems Engineering ToolsMITRE 1

How Much Is Your Architecture Worth 1

Evolution of a MITRE Tool 2

Welcome to the Enterprise Technology Laboratory (ETLab) 2

Using the Netica Software Tool for Terrorist Risk Assessment 3

A Perspective on Popkin System Architect 4

Architects Cannot Live by Tools Alone EA Must Speak to Business Users 5

The Other EA Tools 6

Using Tools in the Context of EA Efforts 8

IT Investment Management and Enterprise Architecture 10

USMC DRPM AAA Program Benefits from Establishing an EA Program 12

GroupSystems II Asynchronous Collaborative Collection of Requirements 12

Want to Learn More 14

Selecting Software Tools 15

Attention EA Practitioners 15

System Engineering Process Toolkits Available on SEPOrsquos Public Web Site 16

Highlights of the next issue of Collaborations In our next issue we will look at the chal-lenges in creating systems engineering plans (SEPs) at MITRE What are SEPs How are they written at MITRE and by whom What does the customer expect to be able to do with them Who ultimately uses the SEP We will present SEPs produced by various Centers and offer hints on creating them as well as the value that they can add to programs

How Much Is Your Architecture WorthOwning an enterprise architecture (EA) is like owning a car Most organizations have one Yours may be a luxury model with all the bells and whistles or a bare-bones economy model It may even be an ugly junker that gets you where you want to go or a lemon that doesnrsquot work But what you always want to know is how much is your EA worth to your organization

The answer may be found by determin-ing whether you use th EA To carry the car metaphor further is it on the road parked in the garage or up on blocks Determining its value or worth is an exercise in checking the incorporation of information that you use to develop the EA into the actions and decisions that your organization makes and the direction it will take Value is also determined by how the EA aids the approach an organi-zation uses in making changes to the way it currently does business or it may be determined by the potential impact that a

change will have on the people who are performing or interacting with a particular aspect of the business

To understand or measure what your EA is worth you must first determine if the EA clearly articulates what your organization does to carry out its business n Does your EA show what functions

your organization performs n Does the EA indicate how well these

functions need to be performed n Does it identify what constituen-

cies you must satisfy by function and whether they have the same needs as the businessThe worth of an EA is also determined

by how well the EA can manage change and support decisions that need to be made in the course of the day-to-day business of the organization n Does the EA show who is responsible

for performing specific functions in the business

n Does it show what constituencies these functions serve

Architecture continued on page 5

2 ________________________________________________________________________ SEPO Collaborations mdash Volume 4 Issue 1

supporting over one billion dollars worth of government programs

Success of this MITRE-developed risk management tool led to frequent requests for RiskNav demonstra-tionevaluation copies from

government academia indus-try and NATO New issues emerged related to support and distribution as RiskNav evolved from a prototype to a product

RiskNav is a Web-based application with server and database components Instal-lation of RiskNav is more difficult than installation of a simple executable or MS Excel-based tool

CEMrsquos Enterprise Technology Laboratory (ETLab) is a hands-on systems engineering lab that also serves as a showcase for sponsor demonstrations The ETLab includes collaborative lab space suitable for use by small working groups as well as Classified and Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) lab facilities

The ETLab offers conferencing resources with the usual complement of audiovisual capabilities (VTC plasma displays VCR DVD and DSS) and a variety of UNIX and Windows-based systems For most people the labrsquos real draw is its growing portfolio of software much of it consisting of EA resources such as

n Erwin v41 This AllFusion ERwin Data Modeler helps create and maintain databases data warehouses and enterprise data models

n Extend v65 A flexible extendable simulation tool that models every aspect of an organization at all levels of expertisemdashfrom manager to engineerscientist and from novice to professional modeler

n Metis v347 The EA modeling tool Metis creates vi-sualizes changes shares and manages visual enterprise models

n NetViz v60 A unique visualization tool that helps you understand and manage your information technology and business systems

MITRE applies rapid prototyping to develop concepts and solutions in a timely and cost-effective manner A well-designed prototype may lead to either further improvements for the initial sponsor or reuse by a new sponsor

The evolution of RiskNavreg is an example of how this process culminated in the creation of a new commer-cial risk tool The technol-ogy transfer occurred after many incremental improve-ments of the initial concept Concurrently RiskNav usage expanded into many govern-ment agencies represented by several MITRE Centers including the Washington Command Control and Communications (WC3) Center the Center for Integrated Intelligence Systems (CIIS) the Center for Advanced Aviation

System Development (CAASD) and the Center for Air Force Command and Control Systems (CAFC2S)

RiskNav is a risk manage-ment tool that MITRE developed to facilitate the program risk assessment

process and help program managers manage their risk space RiskNav theory started with the support of an Air Force program In 2000 the Center for Enter-prise Modernization (CEM) demonstrated this theory in a software prototype that provided features lacking in commercially available risk management tools By April of 2003 RiskNav was

The evolution of RiskNav is an example of how this process culminated in the creation of a new commercial risk tool

MITRE is in the process of licensing its RiskNav technology Companies who license the RiskNav software may extend its functionality to build new and improved versions for commercial as well as government users They may also incorpo-rate elements of RiskNav technology into their existing product line This transfer is an excellent example of how MITRE serves the public interest by making afford-able technology available to for-profit businesses Govern-ment users can obtain a free copy by contacting SEPOmitreorg

For more information about RiskNavreg contact Norman Bram 781-271-8822 nbrammitreorg

Evolution of a MITRE Tool mdash From Rapid Prototype to Commercial Product

Welcome to the Enterprise Technology Laboratory (ETLab)

SEPO Collaborations mdash Volume 4 Issue 1 _______________________________________________________________________ 3

Using the Netica Software Tool for Terrorist Risk AssessmentA MITRE research project used Netica from Norsys Software Corp (wwwnorsyscom) to develop a methodology for improv-ing counterterrorism analysis The project Indications and Warning (IampW) for Countering Terrorism employed Netica to support Bayesian Inference Networks (BINs) development in performing terrorist risk assessment

The BIN approach provides a probabilis-tic framework for analyzing terrorist attack timelines such as the sequence of terror-ist activities that led to the September 11 attacks Associated precursor activities serve as indicators of possible terrorist actions at various stages intent planning preparation and execution At the planning stage for example we might expect to see meetings funds transfers and visa applications

At the preparation stage we would anticipate finding surveillance of target areas videotaping or suspicious individ-uals seeking sensitive information or participating in question-able activities such as flight training At the execution stage we could be wary of suspicious individuals purchasing airline tickets of signal intelligence (goodbyes) and funds transfers (in the opposite direction)

Capturing these precursor activities in BINs provides a means of integrating disparate and uncertain indicators of suspicious activity and possible terrorist plans This informa-tion can also be used to update the relative probabilities of a range of associated terrorist attacks BINs can establish probabilistic links between possible terrorist actions and their necessary preparatory activities which can then be used as

n Popkin System Architect v100 A comprehensive modeling solution that provides all the tools necessary for the development of successful EA models

n Prosight v50 A portfolio management tool that helps corporations make well-informed business decisions

n Rational Suite This suite consisting of Rational Rose and Requisite Pro provides the tools and processes necessary for developing and deploying software for e-business infrastructure and embedded systems companies

In addition the CEM ETLab supports several data-bases and related tools such as DB2 Oracle 9i Enterprise Edition Crystal Reports 90 the ERSI GIS Products (ArcGIS ArcView ArcEditor ArcInfo and ArcIMS) XMLSpy 2004 the Inxight v50 search engine and more

These products may be used for direct project support Additional licenses for some of these tools such as System Architect Metis and Prosight have been set up as a special capability in the ETLabrsquos Tools Testbed While the testbed focuses on tools of interest to CEM it is available to everyone in MITRE for test and evalua-tion The tools testbed can be used in support of internal research programs and continuing education and as a means of collaborating and information sharing across Centers

The ETLab is located at MITRErsquos Rappahannock Building on West Branch Road McLean VA New tools are added and upgraded periodically so to stay updated contact Jill Becker 703-983-6720 jbeckermitreorg

Netica continued on page 4

Figure 1 Simple Bayesian Network of Terrorist Activities


To manage the transformation of a business modeling is essential Although an extensive requirements document could potentially cover all the neces-sary details itrsquos unlikely that it would be read much less understood Enterprise models provide the ability to view your enterprise from different perspectives through a graphical representation For enterprise models that require levels of decomposition and need to be linked to other models you must use a tool that includes a repository for architectural elements their definitions and the relationships among them Linkages and navigation capabilities allow the archi-tect to see how a particular object (ie activity) impacts or is impacted by other objects in the repository

Most modeling tools include an integrated data dictionary that contains information about all the graphical representations in the repository Other tools require the architect to build these data dictionary capabilities from scratch Either way this is a valued capability for enterprise modeling since it helps to illustrate the alignment of business and information technology (IT) through an integrated architecture model

The Popkin System Architect (SA) V101 is a popular enterprise modeling tool that can be used to build integrated enterprise architectures It stores the object information in its integrated data dictionary and allows it to be shared across architectural views This promotes the re-use of objects and eliminates the need to propagate information manually to all the instances of an object Popkin SA also comes with various frameworks that serve as guides to determine what artifacts should be developed to repre-sent the goals and objectives of your EA

Irsquove used SA in the following programs

n Defense Information Systems Agency Information Technology Contracting Office Enterprise Systems Modern-ization program MITRE recom-mended the architecture components to be developed for this program We customized the meta-model as well as the frameworks using SA The De-partment of Defense (DoD) Archi-tecture Framework was customized to include artifacts from the Zach-mann framework which captured information that best represents the scope and goals of the architecture effort

n Business Management Moderniza-tion Program (BMMP) BMMP is using SA for the DoD Business Enterprise Architecture In our inde-pendent verification and validation role MITRE identified gaps between artifacts and missing data with the SA reporting capabilities We also performed semantic checks and identified unconformities to modeling standards using the model integrity verification capabilities

Popkin SA can be licensed as a stand-alone tool validated on your local machine or as a network tool where a license manager controls the number of concurrent users based on the licensing agreement With the network license manager however you can use the application only on the network While this means you cannot show the models

to sponsors directly from the tool SA gives you the option of publishing your models as Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) files so that anyone who does not have the tool can view and navigate through the models

Many tools are available for EA Choosing the right one to perform a task is always a challenge when considering cost training and the learning curve SA is affordable stable and (because it is DoDAF compliant) itrsquos used by many of our customers SA is currently working on developing Core Architecture Data Model (CADM) eXtensible Markup Language (XML) to integrate the tool with the DoD Architecture Repository System (DARS) DARS is a National Information Infrastructure effort to integrate architectures from multiple architecture modeling tools

Some complain that SA is not a user-friendly tool and that you must be an expert in order to use it Yes training is required The tool assumes that the architect understands model-ing notations (ie Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Integration Definition for Function Modeling (IDEF) methodology) since it constrains the model construction based on the chosen notation or methodology Architects also need to use the tool to stay current and to understand how to optimize the use of its capabilities

For more information about MITRErsquos use of SA contact Andrean Coloacuten-Padilla 703-983-7366 acolonmitreorg

Many tools are available for EA Choosing the right one to perform a task is always a challenge when considering cost training and the learning curve

A Perspective on Popkin System Architect


Creating a perfect technology solution for a service-oriented architecture (SOA) some-times may not be enough for your customer Even though the ideal SOA covers the full range of IT capabilities it must also address the busi-ness goals of your client

Suppose that your SOA comes with a technical view of the processes and industry standards that are needed to implement viable instances of the architecture Letrsquos say that the SOA also features a logical data model that reflects the data entities data exchange packages and data repositories required to manage moving data into and out of the enterprise Finally presume that all applicable security and privacy require-ments have been more than adequately met thus confirm-ing that your SOA is as ldquogood as it can getrdquo

To top off this scenario envision analytical results ldquoprovingrdquo that for a one-time cost of $25 million the new SOA will reduce IT mainte-nance and support costs $5 million a year for the next 7 to 10 years That is the projected return on invest-ment (ROI) for your SOA is at least $10 million With some luck it might turn out to be quite a lot more Your agencyrsquos chief informa-tion officer (CIO) is at once ecstatic and impatient She can hardly wait to showcase your SOA which will be irresistible (she thinks) to

budgeting decision makers Any lingering doubts will surely be offset by the projected budget windfall which can only be realized if spending approval is granted

ldquoWhatrsquos wrong with this picturerdquoThatrsquos the question your CIO will likely face from seasoned business leaders who may think ldquoThough you may have found a perfect answer for replacing our current IT systems how does your proposed solution add value to our businessrdquo To business leaders of your agency it might seem that nothing in the scenario described above suggests that the ldquoperfectrdquo SOA was developed to

further their business goals and needs If this scenario comes close to describ-ing your EA-development project the deficiency repre-sents a serious risk to your clientrsquos success and it needs to be quickly addressed Federal EA projects should not be driven by IT econom-ics but by a strategic vision of the business which aims to streamline and improve the delivery of government services

Like the physical facili-ties occupied by government workers and the real estate upon which those facilities are built IT represents just one of the many costs of doing business Although many sites around the

country can be found where cheaper more comfortable facilities might be procured for government use you wouldnrsquot recommend that your agency move to one of those sites no matter what the projected facilityrsquos ROI is First yoursquod give serious consideration to the impact of such a move on the organi-zationrsquos ability to perform its mission Indeed under-standing an organizationrsquos goals and objectives should be the starting point for any significant change initiative regardless of the urgency of the mandate behind it The best place to start is at the top of an agency with a thorough review of its published mission statement its goals and objectives and its latest strategic plan1

Architects continued on page 3

Architects Cannot Live by Tools Alone EA Must Speak to Business Users

Figure 2 Federal Case Management Needs for Law Enforcement Purposes


The Other EA ToolsEven though developing the artifacts within a particular EA framework may seem a daunting task we still need to do more The information within any EA framework is only a static representation We need to perform dynamic analyses to see if the performance we defined is feasible and is likely to occur within given constraints

But even static and dynamic analysis is not enough The analysis information must be integrated in two ways with the enterprisersquos decision environment or the use of the EA will be limited Enterprise managers must make decisions in relation to performance trade-offs (both organizational and technical) project achievability and funding In addition to the static analysis framework tools such as Trouxrsquos Metis and Pokinrsquos SA we need dynamic analysis tools and decision analysis tools

Dynamic Analysis ToolsDynamic analysis focuses on observing the execution of a model of the enterprise and making inferences based on these observations Dynamic analysis uses various kinds of simulation models The advantage of dynamic analysis is that it provides the ability to review actual results and the influences of changes in variables on the results rather than drawing broad conclu-sions as the static models do The general limitation of dynamic analysis is that the model may not have high fidelity with the real world and so may not represent what will actually occur Within the EA domain the drive is to develop execut-able architectures that are near-direct instantiations of the static artifacts to increase real-world fidelity

However the drive to executable architecture-based simulation is not just

to validate a static analysis but to integrate the static and dynamic analysis so that agency managers can make appropriate decisions given potential changes in the enterprisersquos environment The 2004 MITRE Sponsored Research project ldquoExecutable Architecture Methodology for Analysisrdquo offers an example of linking static and dynamic analyses Examples of simula-tion tools for enterprise archi-tecture dynamic analysis are

PIKOS BonapartForty-five standard analyses maintain model consistency and quality They also answer common questions on topics such as direct and indirect costs of people resources and data processing systems time series analysis manage-ment scope communication structures etc An additional 35 user-defined analyses are provided and are easily modified to create any desired analysis

CACI SIMPROCESSSIMPROCESS is a business process modeling and process simulation tool that supports process analysis reengineer-ing process monitoring business performance predic-tion and continual process management It combines discrete event simulation process mapping flow-charting and activity-based costing SIMPROCESS spans simulation and process modeling and supports EA initiatives

ARIS SimulationARIS Simulation performs dynamic analysis of business processes ARIS Simula-tion is fully integrated in the ARIS Toolset enabling use of the data related to the processes (recorded in the ARIS Toolset) as a basis for the simulation of business processes This supports analysis of the executability of processes process weak points resource bottlenecks and different alternative processes

Proforma ProVision EnterpriseProVision Enterprise contains 23 integrated strategy process and system modelers along with Monte Carlo and discrete event simulators model inter-preters a Web-enabled publishing facility a spell-ingcompleteness checker and model comparison facility A Business Process Execution Language interface module is also available that supports the generation of

code for Web services from process definitions created in ProVision

ProModel Solutions Process SimulatorProcess Simulator quickly and easily adds simulation capabilities and analysis to Microsoft Visio flowcharts value stream maps and workflow diagrams Process Simulator installs as a plug-in to Visio allowing you to seamlessly create and run simulation models inside Visio As a result you can build ldquoas-isrdquo and ldquoto-berdquo workflow models and quickly understand time-based quantitative impacts of changes This simulator predicts resource require-ments capital equipment investments process times and service levels

Decision Analysis ToolsIn a holistic sense EA analysis is an optimiza-tion problem Given the enterprisersquos stated goals and environment constraints how does it structure its organiza-tional and systems resources to attain the goals Enterprise architects use decision analy-sis techniques to solve various parts of this overall problem Both the static and dynamic EA analyses provide informa-tion to support the decision analysis Three key types of decision analyses are perfor-mance trade-offs achievabil-ity and portfolio funding n Performance trade-offs

identify changes to perfor-mance measures to attain

SEPO Collaborations mdash Volume 4 Issue 1 _______________________________________________________________________

improved performance given various constraints

n Achievability decides on organizational policies and directions that increase the likelihood of attaining the desired overall perfor-mance given the current defined organizational system and acquisition performance

n Portfolio funding decides on the most desirable over-all performance subject to the funds that are available now and in the future

Enterprise architects support these three decision analyses as they perform the static and dynamic EA analy-ses These decision analyses must be integrated with the EA analyses in two ways first allowing the impact of alternatives to be understood and second understanding how a planned change to the EA may strengthen or invali-date a previous decision Many tools support decision analysis Irsquove grouped them into inference modeling and portfolio analysis

Inference ModelingPerformance trade-offs such as organizational process performance and achievability analyses have influences utility value and uncertainty associated with them Influence diagrams and Bayesian networks are generally used for such decisions Analytica Quiddity and Netica (see article on page 3) are three tools to consider

Lumina Decision Systems AnalyticaAnalytica is an influence diagram-based visual environment for creating analyzing and communicat-ing probabilistic models for business risk and decision analysis It has a user-friendly intuitive interface that includes hierarchical submod-els and a variety of graphs Analytica is especially good when a problem requires modeling both continuous and discrete variables

IET Quiddity Suite Quiddity is a Bayesian modeling tool that supports the modeling of complex multi-entity inference situa-tions such as understand-ing multi-organization performance It has a simple conceptual structure based on multi-entity Bayesian model-

ing using first-order logic and object-oriented analysis This structure allows devel-opment of Bayesian network fragments and merges the fragments into a situation-specific Bayesian network model for analysis when required The Quiddity tool supports the development of a reusable library of Bayes-

ian fragments which can be quickly combined to support future analysis in related domains

Norsys Software Corp Netica Netica is a powerful program that implements Bayes-ian networks and influence diagrams Users can specify the interaction of variables in terms of conditional proba-bilities equations or data files of observations (The conditional probability distri-butions will be learned from these observations) Netica is very fast and comes with a multi-language application programmerrsquos interface (API) library that allows software development around Netica

Portfolio AnalysisWhich combination of systems provides the best benefits to the organiza-

tion given their respective performance and cost You could use an inference tool such as Analytica or one of the following packages to find out In addition MITRErsquos Center for Acquisition and Systems Analysis group has developed the Portfolio Analysis Machine (PALMA) tool for this purpose

ProSight Portfolios ProSight provides a gover-nance framework for EA and capital planning and investment control (CPIC) processes and compliance within the federal govern-ment helping agencies integrate the EA and CPIC processes It provides a common easily understood reference point for dynamic and collaborative portfolio management aggregating and interfacing many data sources to consolidate the informa-tion in one location

PlanView Enterprise PlanView Enterprise combines a comprehensive IT portfolio management solution real-time portfolio analytics and best-of-breed resource management and processes Working together these elements give custom-ers total IT visibility fewer redundancies increased efficiency and the ability to focus limited resources on higher value work By integrating analytics with root-cause analysis PlanView Enterprise enables optimiza-tion yielding even greater cost savings

For more information these tools click on the tool name and it will take you to the vendorsrsquo site (soft copy only) Or contact William Bunting 703-983-1919 wbuntingmitreorg

The information within any EA framework is only a static representation We need to perform dynamic analyses to see if the performance we defined is feasible and is likely to occur within given constraints


Using Tools in the Context of EA EffortsWhy do we need EA tools EA tools are complex business and technology programs that incorporate a great range of information from business policies to the description of processes and organizations that support the policies through the technologies that support and enable those business processes You are just as likely to find some of the text of an executive order in an EA as the network protocols routers and switches that are used in the communications network for the enterprise

This large and complex compendium of information must be researched documented maintained and especially analyzed and reviewed to be of value in the EA An EA exists to answer questions and to solve business problems If the data that support the answers are hidden then the EA has no value

An EA can contain text flowcharts (many different flowcharting protocols may exist in a single EA) tables images video and data elements from relational databases Today the EA will also be made available via the Web to its stakeholders and will need to commu-nicate via common proto-cols (especially XML) with outside parties such as the Office of Manage-ment and Budget (OMB)

Benefits of Having EA Tools at the Enterprisersquos DisposalAutomated tools are becoming a required item in an EA While the EA and other capital invest-ment governance and

management processes donrsquot automati-cally demand an automated tool they can be hampered by the lack of such a tool Itrsquos possible to use standardized office support products such as word processing spreadsheets databases and content management systems to hold the EArsquos artifacts Creation of the initial architectural elements will not be impeded by those tools However the following activities will be impeded or must be augmented by significant manual workn Linking EA artifacts within a domain

(higher to lower levels)n Linking EA artifacts between do-

mains (such as tying an IT applica-tion system to a function in a business process)

n Correlating EA artifacts to a frame-work or FEA reference model

n Correlating EA artifacts to a capital investment project

n Finding any particular artifact in an EA

n Maintaining EA artifacts and objects (knowing what is in the EA to update

and what might need to be addressed as it ages)

All the above arguments easily translate into generic requirements for an EA support tool These products have weaknesses which differ from product to product but do not detract from the importance of having such a tool Weaknesses are in the area of non-archi-tect access to information management level presentations and reporting tool learning curves tool adaptation and ramp-up efforts to align with an enter-prisersquos requirements software version updates and control of the tool

Where Do Tools Fit in the Processes Supporting EAThe process of creating and maintaining EAs is demanding and requires coordi-nation across an enterprise The EA tool will be a vital component in all these steps The following diagram created by Charlie Martinez (WC3) shows a generic approach to the EA process

The chart shows examples of how an EA tool is used in each high-level step of the process

Figure 3 A Generic Approach to the EA Process


Determine intended use for the architecture

Analyzing and storing the business drivers for the effort (if not already in the tool) will help to focus the effort Documenting them in the tool will allow later artifacts of the EA to be aligned with the business drivers and OMB business areaslines (a key component in obtaining capital project funding)

Determine scope of the architectural effort

This is also an alignment-sensitive task It does not require extensive tool interac-tions However the categorization of EA data with scope-bounded problems will help later efforts stay within the bounds of the problem set Without a tool itrsquos easier to build a mountain out of a molehill By no means though can the tool alone ensure a properly limited scope

Determine data required to support architecture development

The rigor of the tool and the frame-work or artifacts chosen for this scoped effort will now set the ldquohow do I collect

itrdquo bounds The tool will help frame the questions and type of data needed

Collect organize correlate and store architecture data

This is where the tool will be the constant companion of the architects All data must be input or accessed and potentially amended in the tool The greatest volume of tool usage is during this phase

Conduct analyses in support of architecture objectives

This is one of the two phases in support of the tool which produces the most obvious value Questions for the EA such as ldquohow manyrdquo ldquowhenrdquo ldquowhererdquo should be obtainable from the tool Overlaps (accessing the same system replacing the same function etc) can be detected In many cases modeling tools can be tied into the data stored in the EA tool

Document results aligned with architecture frameworks

In some cases what used to be a demanding extra step can now be rolled

into a ldquotune the toolrdquo or ldquohow to use the toolrdquo step and thus eliminate the duplicate effort that a manual approach requires Tools can generate output and store information in alignment with standard frameworks and increasingly generate output in alignment with the FEA reference model needs Tools can also be configured to support a custom-ized framework although that requires significant additional up-front effort

The tools will support more ties than the EA process itself The CPIC process can automatically tie to the EA tool Each capital investment must align with the EA-automated linkages between major vendors to allow that alignment to be extracted from the tool itself The subsequent Exhibit 300 generation (in an XML format) can then pull align-ment with FEA reference models that have cascaded from the business lines in the EA tool FEA reference models should have most components repre-sented in the architecture and therefore in the EA tool where the information can be generated for reports

Using Tools continued on page 4

Determine intended use for the

architecture

Analyzing and storing (if not already in the tool) the business drivers for the effort will help to focus

the effort Documenting in the tool will allow later artifacts of the EA to be aligned with the business

drivers and OMB business areaslines (a key component in obtaining capital project funding)

Determine the scope of the archi-

tectural effort

This is also an alignment-sensitive task It does not require extensive tool interactions However the

categorization of EA data with scope-bounded problems will help later efforts stay within bounds of

the problem set Without a tool itrsquos easier to build a mountain out of a molehill By no means though

does the tool alone ensure a properly limited scope

Determine data required to

support architecture development

The rigor of the tool and the framework or artifacts chosen for this scoped effort will now set the

ldquohow do I collect itrdquo bounds The tool will help frame the questions and type of data needed

Collect organize correlate and

store architecture data

This is where the tool will be the constant companion of the architects All data must be input or

accessed and potentially amended in the tool The greatest volume of tool usage is during this phase

Conduct analyses in support of

architecture objectives

This is one of the two phases for which the tool produces the most obvious value in support of

Questions for the EA such as ldquohow manyrdquo ldquowhenrdquo and ldquowhererdquo should be obtainable from the tool

Overlaps (accessing the same system replacing the same function etc) can be detected In many

cases modeling tools can be tied into the data stored in the EA tool

Document results aligned with

architecture frameworks

In some cases what used to be a demanding extra step can now be rolled into a ldquotune the toolrdquo or

ldquohow to use the toolrdquo step and eliminates the duplicate effort that a manual approach requires Tools

can generate output and store information in alignment with standard frameworks and increasingly

generate output in alignment with the FEA reference model needs Tools can also be configured to

support a customized framework although that requires significant additional upfront effort

10 _______________________________________________________________________ SEPO Collaborations mdash Volume 4 Issue 1

IT Investment Management and Enterprise Architecture

GAOrsquos ITIM Maturity Model4

Based on its experience in assisting agencies to improve the management of their information technology (IT) portfo-lios the Government Accountability Office (GAO) decided to update the Exposure Draft Version 1 of its Information Technology Investment Management A Framework for Assessing and Improving Process Maturity (GAOAIMD-10123) by publishing Version 11 (GAO-04-394G) in March 2004

The GAO document provides a framework to analyze an agencyrsquos IT investment management processes through the use of an Rigorous standardized tool for internal and external evalu-

ations of these processesn Consistent and understandable mechanism for reporting

the results of assessmentsn Road map that agencies can follow in improving their

processes

The GAO Information Technology Investment Manage-ment (ITIM) Maturity Model is based on similar Capability Maturity Models (CMM) developed by the System Engineer-ing Institute (SEI) eg CMM for software and software acquisition and the framework developed by GAO for the assessment of EAs

Version 11 both refines and differentiates from the GAO ITIM Maturity Model Version 1 with the clear understand-ing that ldquoone size DOES NOT fit allrdquo The document states repeatedly that each agency must determine how best to meet the specified maturity criteria in a manner appropriate to its specific environment (mission size complexity) and the nature and value of its IT portfolio

Based on the ClingerndashCohen Act of 1996 and its ldquoSelect Control Evaluaterdquo management paradigm (Figure 4) the ITIM Maturity Model reflects GAOrsquos and OMBrsquos ongoing ldquoSelect Control Evaluaterdquo Management Paradigm efforts to ensure that IT projects are properly aligned with each agencyrsquos EA and that IT projects are properly managed to ensure that risks are mitigated and the expected return on investment is achieved

Putting aside changes in detail the most fundamental difference between the two versions of the document is that the exposure draft focused on Process whereas Version 11 focuses on Outcomes Figure 5 shows not only the greater emphasis on performance measurement but also the criteria used to define the individual maturity stages

As one example Version 11 is very specific in GAOrsquos minimum expectations of how an agency should select invest-ments and manage its portfolio (Stage 2 and Stage 3) By contrast the Exposure Draft provided only vague definitions and terminologyn Repeatable investment control techniques are in place and

key foundation capabilities have been implemented (Stage 2)n Comprehensive IT investment portfolio selection and con-

trol techniques are in place that incorporate benefit and risk criteria linked to mission goals and strategies (Stage 3)

GAO emphasizes that the purpose of its maturity model is not to prescribe the ldquohowrdquo of achieving increased control over an agencyrsquos IT portfolio but rather to describe the characteristics that identify increased effectiveness in managing IT assets

According to GAO Stages 2 and 3 have been the primary beneficiaries of the lessons learned from the use of the frame-work since its publication and comments received in response to the Exposure Draft Stage 2 avoids the previous ambiguity to ensure more consistent interpretation by specifically spelling out criteria for project selection and by adding the requirement

that IT investment boards be not only established but also aligned at this stage rather than at Stage 3 Experience shows that the proper alignment of IT investment boards is critical to avoid conflicts of authority and scope

Based on the significant work that has been done in recent years GAO also points out that Stage 3 was enhanced to better explain IT portfolio management Additionally GAO added post implemen-tation reviews (PIRs) as a

Figure 4 ldquoSelect Control Evaluaterdquo Management Paradigm

SEPO Collaborations mdash Volume 4 Issue 1 ______________________________________________________________________ 11

qualifier for Stage 3 maturity (Originally they were not required until Stage 4) Consequently Stage 3 agencies now have to demonstrate full control over their IT investments following the ClingerndashCohen ldquoSelect Control Evaluaterdquo model

In the context of the Engineering Archi-tecture Body of Knowledge (EABOK) the revised GAO model recognizes that there can be no disciplined ITIM decision-making without reference to the agencyrsquos EA (to the extent that one exists) The impact of this line of thinking becomes clear in the recent changes by OMB to the requirements for Exhibit 300 which must be submitted annually by all agencies under OMB Circular A-11 Preparation Submission and Execu-tion of the Budget July 2004 as part of their documentation for budget requests relating to major IT investments5

When completing Exhibit 300 Part IIA each agency must not only demonstrate compliance of its major IT investments with its EA but also state whether the agencyrsquos EA review board has reviewed the investment The agency also must demonstrate how the investment maps to the EA reference models developed by OMBrsquos Federal Enterprise Architecture Project Management Office (FEAPMO) When reviewing the submissions OMB uses this information to score agencies on EA compliance resulting in direct and possibly negative budgetary consequences for the agency

If anything the GAO ITIM maturity model may be more forgiving than OMB since most agencies are still in the process of developing their EA While OMB appears to set the bar quite high in its expectations of EA compliance when considering

investments GAO states that it will be useful if at a minimum the organizationrsquos EA is used as a repository for investment information This helps decision makers to avoid duplication or overlap in approving new investments ensures that each invest-

ment is evaluated as part of an invest-ment portfolio and provides specific value to the organization

Only at Stage 4 and Stage 5 are agencies expected to use their EAs as a major tool to improve portfolio manage-ment and the ability of IT to shape strategic outcomes

Stage 4 emphasizes evaluation techniques to improve the performance of both individual IT projects and the

portfolio as a whole This stage uses the organizationrsquos EA as a control mechanism to n Add value over the typical project-centric gathering of les-

sons learned through PIRsn Enable agencies to look across PIRs to identify recommen-

dations for changing and improving the overall IT invest-ment process

At Stage 5 the EA itself is expected to become the object of business performance-oriented improvement efforts as agencies seek to become more agile and look to ldquobest-in-classrdquo organizations for benchmarks and breakthrough technologies

MITRE is positioned to help government executives understand the actions they need to progress toward leverag-ing IT for strategic outcomes For more information contact Matthias Senger Ph D 703-983-6353 msengermitreorg

Figure 5 Performance Measurement and Maturity Stages

the ITIM Maturity Model reflects GAOrsquos and OMBrsquos ongoing efforts to ensure that IT projects are properly aligned with each agencyrsquos EA


The Direct Reporting Program Management Advanced Amphibi-ous Assault (DRPM AAA) Vehicle Program is the United States Marine Corps (USMC) top priority ground weapon system acquisition program The DRPM AAA program delivers battlefield capabilities to the Navy and USMC for amphibious operations in support of expeditionary maneuver warfare Information management is used to create convergence among complex dependent work packages and activities to achieve mission success moving the program towards net-centricity to attain information superiority

The EA program helps program management relate the programrsquos vision and mission to the enterprisersquos business operations systems and infrastructure EA provides decision support for budget justification and acquisition planning DRPM AAA is using the EA program to improve

overall program effectiveness rather than to meet federal mandates This focus has yielded successful program-wide support and cooperation in estab-lishing the EA program and provided more immediate benefits

The EA approach began with inter-views of each directorate to capture individual views of critical success business processes The processes were analyzed as a collective set The

Information management is used to converge complex dependent work packages and activities to achieve mission success moving the program towards net-centricity to attain information superiority

result indicated a convergence on the processes that are key to current program objectives and long term objectives These processes were priori-tized based on Six Sigma6 guidance The critical processes serve as input for building the enterprise-wide archi-tecture By examining touch points to existing command control commu-nications computers and intelligence (C4I) operations the architecture helps address information flow from program management to battlefield to logistics support

The impact of business process development throughout the program paved the way for the EA team to build essential components for manag-ing and institutionalizing EA practices in the DRPM AAA program This includes establishing a review board steering committee program plan governance plan policies and the like This approach established executive

If the definition of a capability is a positive high-level statement of an outcome for a business process service or development program that leads to specific functional requirements then the line of sight between capabilities and requirements begs the ability for any large federal organization to update change validate or expand

Some organizations attempt to update this connec-tion on a quarterly basis if their missions or businesses are in a constant state of flux Others only collect and report changed capabilitiesrequirements annually Whether quarter-ly or yearly within a given enterprise life cycle of projects changing capabilities and subsequent requirements must be collected discussed and validated with stakeholders in a timely and user-friendly manner in order to meet submission

deadlines for new business transformation areasThe EA tool GroupSystems II adds revises and deletes

capabilities and requirements instantaneously among the proper team users allowing the iterative enterprise life cycle management wheel to grind on with no appreciable stoppageThe enterprise life cycle governance team respon-sible for the quarterly or yearly changes of either capabilities or their requirements sends out the list for review across the enterprise to the appropriate users

All of this can be done synchronously or asynchronously and sent back to the originating team to begin the process of updating revising or deleting capabilities or requirements that have changed over the course of the projectrsquos life

At the right is a sample of the GroupSystems II EA tool

GroupSystems II Asynchronous Collaborative Collection of Requirements

USMC continued on page 6

USMC DRPM AAA Program Benefits from Establishing an EA Program


When Your Tool Bag Is Empty Techniques Can Save the DayFor an EA initiative to start at the top however your team needs to have the wherewithal to perform effectively at a strategic level where even the fullest kit of EA tools is soon rendered all but useless It also means that your team must help your client formu-late or refine a vision of the future organization In many instances you must sketch a new paradigm for future business operations At this early stage of the initiative innovative techniques are needed more than tools

Yoursquoll also need thinkers who can creatively wander beyond traditional boundar-ies and established role defini-tions The idea is to engage the client in imagineering exercises not engineering activities The finest tools to be brought to bear on these work sessions may be nothing more elegant than chart

paper Post-It notes masking tape whiteboards and magic markers Indeed my experi-ence suggests that the more primitive the tools the easier it is to connect with business leaders in such a setting

Once this launch phase of an EA initiative is success-fully negotiated aided by the liberal use of envisioneering the next most important techniques to be intro-duced are communication communication and commu-nications Even the sharp-est business vision if not effectively conveyed will have limited impact on the way future business is conducted Here again my own experi-ence suggests that the simpler the medium the more widely the message is likely to be disseminated Thatrsquos why a PowerPoint slide or two can be more effective than the output of the most powerful EA tool when it comes to communicating a visionary concept to business users

An Illustrated Concept of Federal Case ManagementTo assess the communica-bility of a single diagram (below) which aims to convey a great deal of information about the federal vision2 for business processes needed to support the Case Manage-ment line of business3 and the law-enforcement-related domains that need to apply those processes Developed by CEM for the Department of Justice (DOJ) the concept depicted in Figure 2 page 5 has given rise to a number of important consequences includingn Separate procurement

initiatives for each of the (three) depicted sets of case management needs this decision alone proved to be a major milestone for federal law enforce-ment officials During some 20 years prior to this concept DOJ had failed to complete four separate initiatives aimed at defining a set of case

Architects continued from page 5 management needs for all case managers Almost im-mediately we discovered important differences in case management require-ments traceable to the way different communities of interest manage their cases and interact with case files

n Specialized business com-munities energized by focusing on the early de-velopment of this concept at the top level we were also able to quickly recog-nize different stakeholder communities which have since been empowered to address their distinc-tive sets of case manage-ment requirements more intently

n Enterprise-level strategic decision support OMB and DOJ have also been able to do a better job of setting implementation priorities which help to inform both near-term and long-term budget considerations

For more information contact Ken Mullins 703-983-3349 kmullinsmitreorg

voting form that allows users to choose from a list of capabilities The voting form can be tailored to show multiple choices check boxes or other custom designs Additionally GroupSystems II gives contributing stakeholders the luxury of adding new capabilities asynchronously along with words in support of their additions in preparation for the face-to-face discussions of the delta since the last updates

The value of this tool is immeasurable It allows an organization to quickly expand content-rich capabilities into useful requirements granting users the line of sight needed to trace their business needs to the projectlifecycle level This tool should not be taken lightly by large enterprises for it is a collaborative organizationally safe method of getting real work done

Polling Method YesNo

Number of People Who Polled Each

Value

Ballot Items Yes No

CAP 001 Ability to set the time to generate the number 1

0 0


0 0


0 0


0 0


0 0


BP Trends (httpwwwbptrendscom) has published a report on enterprise architecture tools that might interest you It is titled The 2005 Enterprise Architecture Process Modeling amp Simula-tion Tools Report and contains information on the following tools

IampWs In particular individual IampWs can be associated with multiple possible terrorist actions An analyst can use any subset of observed IampWs to update the probabilities associated with possible terrorist actions

The figure shows a simple Bayesian network of terrorist activities with some activities highlighted as observed (ie 100 percent ldquoTruerdquo) These observa-tions (IampWs) can then be used to assess the relative likelihood of two potential terrorist attacks ndash in this case a Septem-ber 11-type attack and a nuclear plant attack (via explosives carried on a small airplane)

Uses of BINs include n Ranking possible terrorist actions

by either probability of occurrence expected value to a terrorist or impact on the United States

n Assessing the potential impact of proactive countermeasures on detecting IampWs thus reducing risk of successful terrorist attack

n Providing insight into the most effective allocation of counterterrorism resources

For more information contact Richard Moynihan 781-271-6227 moynihanmitreorg

Netica continued from page 3

The systems development process should also benefit from accessing the EA tool business requirements can be derived directly from the business drivers and business flows in the architecture They can be drawn into requirements tool suites for consider-ation Similarly the technically oriented and application-oriented needs can be drawn into systems development tools or reviewed by IT staff when needed

Tools in a Federated EnvironmentFederated enterprises such as cabinet- level departments (Health and Human Services Treasury Department of Homeland Security) where individual architectures must be analyzed lever-aged and rolled up into department-level architectures present a stronger case for EA tool automation Looking at multiple architectures reveals the need to use systems to help correlate high volumes of information If the tools in use are consistent across the federated enter-prise rollup assistance from the product is likely If not interfaces and manual analysis will make the rollup harder to accomplish A federated enterprise can institute standards that will benefit all in its community for the long term

Tool Vendor ChallengesThe immature state of the EA tool

market presents challenges to the architect and the enterprise Many tools are descended from system develop-ment tools and lack the sophistication for tracking things at an ldquoenterpriserdquo level And because vendors of tools (EA portfolio management systems develop-ment and regulatory) are not universally connected it takes considerable effort to pull data from one tool into another The consolidations in todayrsquos market (TrouxComputas TelelogicPopkin) also show that we cannot guarantee that one particular approach to EA tools will remain constant over time These challenges are not to be taken lightly but they do not mar the basic EA tool value proposition

Just as systems development tool sets have undergone significant evolu-tion over time EA tools will also change significantly Today however the EA process can benefit from applying these tools to support the intended use of the architecture

For more information contact Bruce Gordon 703-983-1024 bgordonmitreorg

n CACIrsquos SIMPROCESS n Holocentricrsquos Holocen-

tric Modeler n IDS Scheerrsquos ARIS n iGrafxrsquos iGrafx n MEGArsquos MEGA Suite n Popkin Softwarersquos Sys-

tem Architect n Process Wizard Ltdrsquos

ProcessWizard

n Proforma Corporationrsquos ProVision

n ProModel Solutionsrsquo Process Simulator

n BML Innovationsrsquo xBPM Innovation The report culminates

in a nice matrix compar-ing these tools You may download the report for free but you must register at the site to do so

Using Tools continued from page

We recommend that you periodically visit the Enterprise Architecture Solutions page to see new links and other resources You may access the page by using Fast Jump to EAS or go directly to httpcemsitesV400V410easdefaultaspx

Want to Learn More


Selecting Software ToolsMITRE is often asked to help our clients select the best software product to perform a certain task Frequently many candidate products might be suitable but how do you identify the best product for your client The following steps are a guide for selecting software products n Identify tool requirements at a very high level Understand-

ing a toolrsquos functionality at a high level helps to identify stakeholders better and perform detailed requirements collection

n Identify your stakeholders Determine the primary and secondary users and each userrsquos role

n Perform a detailed literature search Make use of available information on software tools within MITRE on the Inter-net and from other sources such as Gartner but remember that some information may not be accurate or current

n Collect detailed requirements Identify the precise func-tional requirements for the tool

n Identify technical evaluation criteria although not impor-tant to the end users these criteria may be very critical to the support organization Some technical criteria for an EA tool are system architecture and infrastructure system performance and capability and system support

n Categorize prioritize and weight the detailed requirements Group the detailed requirements into categories prioritize

each detailed requirement within each category and assign a weight to each category that reflects its importance

n Identify your evaluation team This team will attend all vendor presentations and demonstrations and evaluate each product

n Contact vendors and schedule demonstrations It can be very time consuming to coordinate all evaluation team membersrsquo schedules and facilities for the vendor demonstra-tions

n Evaluate each product Rate how well the product meets every detailed requirement on a fixed scale

Once the scores have been computed and the tool that best meets the requirements is identified there may be other factors to consider For example technical evaluation may uncover a requirement that is not acceptable to the acquiring organiza-tion The version of the tool evaluated may not be currently available The vendor may not be able to support the tool in a timely manner These and other considerations may be consid-ered so significant that the tool that best meets the require-ments may not be the best tool to acquire The organization may consider these other factors and select a tool with less functionality but with immediate availability

For more detailed information about selecting software tools contact Carole Meals cmealsmitreorg 703-983-1536

n Does it show what services and information need to be provided to perform a specific function

n Does the EA identify the performance or quality that needs to be achieved as these services are performedThe most important determinant of

the worth of the EA is how well the EA can support the future direction of the organization n Does the EA reflect the current

strategic direction of the organization n Does it identify the functions that

support the organizational strategies directly versus those functions that provide indirect support or those that do not support the strategic direction

n Does the EA identify the functional gaps ie functions that are not performed by the organizationThese questions point to key elements

that if included in the EA drive both understanding and knowledge about the organization while supporting technology investment decisions and organizational change The worth of the EA is a function of how well the EA reflects the organiza-tion and how the organization uses the EA Just like your car the EArsquos worth is determined by how effectively it gets you to your destination

For more information contact Dr Mary T Ayala-Bush 03-83-460 mtabmitreorg

Architecure continued from page Attention EA Practitioners

If you are supporting an enterprise

architecture project for MITRE

or one of its clients or if you have

some expertise in the field that you

are willing to share please regis-

ter your contact information on

the survey form on the Enterprise

Architecture Solutions site You

can access this site via FastJump at

CONTACTS4EA or go directly

to it at httpcemsitesV400

V410easListsEA20Contacts

overviewaspx

To understand or measure what your EA is worth you must first determine if the EA clearly articulates what your organization does to carry out its business


Footnotes1 Should these strategic planning documents not exist

eg when a new ldquoenterpriserdquo (eg the Federal Health Architecture) is established you should start helping your client develop the initial version of each docu-ment as soon as possible

2 The figure is extracted from the working draft of a document titled ldquoConcept for Common Case Management Solutions Across the Federal Govern-mentrdquo first drafted in April 2004 and last updated on December 14 2004

3 Recognizing the need to use government resources more effectively in 2003 the OMB identified case management as one of five business lines in need of a common solutions architecture to focus IT investment decisions on basic sets of business needs shared by multiple federal agencies The other four lines of business are Financial Management Human Resources Management Grants Management and Federal Health Architecture

4 This contribution focuses on those aspects of the GAO ITIM Maturity Model that demonstrate practical uses of EA in the federal arena

5 ldquoMajor IT investmentrdquo means a system or investment that requires special management attention because of its importance to an agencyrsquos missionhellipinvestment is for financial management and spends more than $500000 investment is directly tied to the top two layers of the Federal Enterprise Architecture (Services to Citizens and Mode of Delivery) investment is an integral part of the agencyrsquos modernization blueprint (EA) investment has significant program or policy implications investment has high executive visibility investment is defined as major by the agencyrsquos capital planning and investment control process OMB may work with the agency to declare other investments as major investments

6 Six Sigma is a highly disciplined data-driven process for analyzing the root causes of business problems and solving them The aim of the Six Sigma process is to develop and deliver near-perfect products and services It ties the outputs of a business directly to marketplace requirements and customer specifica-tions and also focuses on shrinking process variation

and stakeholder buy-in a key success factor Overall the practicality reflects the Marinesrsquo ldquolean and meanrdquo approach of tackling issues without waste

For more information contact Sally M Taylor smtaylormitreorg 703-983-6393

USMC continued from page 2

Who We Are

The MITRE Systems Engineering Process Office (SEPO) is a nexus for systems engineering information and activity at MITRE Our team brings together useful systems engineering resources provides guidance on systems engineering process-es and participates in systems engineering activities throughout The MITRE Corporation

Systems engineering resources are avail-able through the SEPO Library which contains a broad spectrum of informa-tion and knowledge to help you on such topics as acquisition systems engineering software engineering decision support and process management

We offer systems engineering guidance through our SEPO Toolkits Toolkits are available online or on CD and include many topics on the systems engineer-ing process For guidance in another area such as Software Engineering Acquisition the Capability Maturity Model - Integrated (CMMI) Process or sponsor-specific systems engineering areas please contact our team

Collaborations is a publication of SEPO For additional information please contact

Brian E White PhD SEPO Director 81-21-8218 Email SEPOmitreorg

This newsletter is a publication of the Systems Engineering Process Office (SEPO) Additional copies are available

The MITRE Corporation 202 Burlington Road Bedford MA 0130-1420 and 515 Colshire Drive McLean VA 22102-508

wwwmitreorgworksepo

David Cleary editor Deanna Mirsky copy editor Susan Robertson designer

copy2006 The MITRE CorporationApproved for Public Release Distribution Unlimited Case Number 06-030

Systems Engineering Process Toolkits Are Available on SEPOrsquos Public Web SiteSEPO has developed a set of flexible yet robust systems engineering processes and the training guidance and tools that our users need when they implement these processes We call these packages ldquoprocess toolkitsrdquo and they define the core systems engineering processes applicable to the development fielding and sustainment of complex systems We currently offer three toolkits on-line and on diskn Risk Management n Partnering n Program Assessment

For a CD version of a toolkit please contact us at sepomitreorg

What Do You ThinkWe welcome feedback from our readers Do you agree or disagree with what is in the newsletter Do you have informa-tion you would like to add We want to publish your responses to share with our other readers

Send email to sepomitreorg with your suggestions

Figure 6 USMCrsquos Advanced Amphibious Assault (AAA) Vehicle


supporting over one billion dollars worth of government programs

Success of this MITRE-developed risk management tool led to frequent requests for RiskNav demonstra-tionevaluation copies from

government academia indus-try and NATO New issues emerged related to support and distribution as RiskNav evolved from a prototype to a product

RiskNav is a Web-based application with server and database components Instal-lation of RiskNav is more difficult than installation of a simple executable or MS Excel-based tool

CEMrsquos Enterprise Technology Laboratory (ETLab) is a hands-on systems engineering lab that also serves as a showcase for sponsor demonstrations The ETLab includes collaborative lab space suitable for use by small working groups as well as Classified and Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) lab facilities

The ETLab offers conferencing resources with the usual complement of audiovisual capabilities (VTC plasma displays VCR DVD and DSS) and a variety of UNIX and Windows-based systems For most people the labrsquos real draw is its growing portfolio of software much of it consisting of EA resources such as

n Erwin v41 This AllFusion ERwin Data Modeler helps create and maintain databases data warehouses and enterprise data models

n Extend v65 A flexible extendable simulation tool that models every aspect of an organization at all levels of expertisemdashfrom manager to engineerscientist and from novice to professional modeler

n Metis v347 The EA modeling tool Metis creates vi-sualizes changes shares and manages visual enterprise models

n NetViz v60 A unique visualization tool that helps you understand and manage your information technology and business systems

MITRE applies rapid prototyping to develop concepts and solutions in a timely and cost-effective manner A well-designed prototype may lead to either further improvements for the initial sponsor or reuse by a new sponsor

The evolution of RiskNavreg is an example of how this process culminated in the creation of a new commer-cial risk tool The technol-ogy transfer occurred after many incremental improve-ments of the initial concept Concurrently RiskNav usage expanded into many govern-ment agencies represented by several MITRE Centers including the Washington Command Control and Communications (WC3) Center the Center for Integrated Intelligence Systems (CIIS) the Center for Advanced Aviation

System Development (CAASD) and the Center for Air Force Command and Control Systems (CAFC2S)

RiskNav is a risk manage-ment tool that MITRE developed to facilitate the program risk assessment

process and help program managers manage their risk space RiskNav theory started with the support of an Air Force program In 2000 the Center for Enter-prise Modernization (CEM) demonstrated this theory in a software prototype that provided features lacking in commercially available risk management tools By April of 2003 RiskNav was

The evolution of RiskNav is an example of how this process culminated in the creation of a new commercial risk tool

MITRE is in the process of licensing its RiskNav technology Companies who license the RiskNav software may extend its functionality to build new and improved versions for commercial as well as government users They may also incorpo-rate elements of RiskNav technology into their existing product line This transfer is an excellent example of how MITRE serves the public interest by making afford-able technology available to for-profit businesses Govern-ment users can obtain a free copy by contacting SEPOmitreorg

For more information about RiskNavreg contact Norman Bram 781-271-8822 nbrammitreorg

Evolution of a MITRE Tool mdash From Rapid Prototype to Commercial Product

Welcome to the Enterprise Technology Laboratory (ETLab)










































































































architecture





tectural effort

































processes





























































Value

Ballot Items Yes No


0 0


0 0


0 0


0 0


0 0




















ProcessWizard







Want to Learn More




































overviewaspx













Who We Are








wwwmitreorgworksepo

















































































































architecture





tectural effort

































processes





























































Value

Ballot Items Yes No


0 0


0 0


0 0


0 0


0 0




















ProcessWizard







Want to Learn More




































overviewaspx













Who We Are








wwwmitreorgworksepo















processes





























































Value

Ballot Items Yes No


0 0


0 0


0 0


0 0


0 0




















ProcessWizard







Want to Learn More




































overviewaspx













Who We Are








wwwmitreorgworksepo
























































Value

Ballot Items Yes No


0 0


0 0


0 0


0 0


0 0




















ProcessWizard







Want to Learn More




































overviewaspx













Who We Are








wwwmitreorgworksepo



























ProcessWizard







Want to Learn More




































overviewaspx













Who We Are








wwwmitreorgworksepo











































overviewaspx













Who We Are








wwwmitreorgworksepo



















Who We Are








wwwmitreorgworksepo








Systems Engineering Tools@MITRE

Documents

Transcript of Systems Engineering Tools@MITRE