UNCLASSIFIED INCOSE Northstar Chapter 09/17/09 Page-1 Systems Engineering in DoD Mr. Gordon Kranz...

UNCLASSIFIEDINCOSE Northstar Chapter09/17/09 Page-1

Systems Engineering in DoD

Mr. Gordon KranzDirector, Major Program Support

Office of the Director, Defense Research & Engineering/Systems Engineering

INCOSE Northstar Chapter09/17/09 Page-0 UNCLASSIFIED 2

Bottom-line Upfront

• DoD 5000.02 changes emphasize early stages of pre-systems acquisition - prior to Milestone B (MS B)– Reduce risk before making business commitment– Improve likelihood of being able to meet commitments

• The Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 furthers this emphasis with – additional certification requirements at MS A and B, – mandatory competitive prototyping, and– system-level Preliminary Design Review [PDR] before MS B for

all MDAPs

Knowledge-based Acquisition – Starting Programs Right!


DoD Instruction 5000.02

• Mandatory Materiel Development Decision

• Mandatory Milestone A for all “major weapon systems” requiring technology development

• Mandatory system-level PDR and CDR with reports to and assessments by the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA)

• Strengthened MDA certifications at Milestones A and B


Acquisition Reform - SE Thumbnail

• New legislation, Public Law 111-23, recognizes the importance of SE to weapon systems acquisition

• Heavy focus on starting MDAPs right:– Development and tracking of measurable performance criteria

as part of SEPs and TESs / TEMPs– Requiring completion of competitive prototypes for all Major

Defense Acquisition Programs– Requiring completion and MDA assessment of a system-level

Preliminary Design Review before MS B– Codifying a role for systems engineering in development

planning, lifecycle management and sustainability

• Yearly OSD assessment to Congress of Component capabilities for SE, development planning, and DT&E and of SE in MDAPs


Summary of Legislation

The Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 contains provisions that will: • Address problems with unreasonable performance requirements by requiring

DoD to reestablish systems engineering organizations and developmental testing capabilities; make trade-offs between cost, schedule and performance early in the program cycle; and conduct preliminary design reviews before giving approval to new acquisition programs;

• Address problems with unreasonable cost and schedule estimates by establishing a new, independent director of cost assessment to ensure that unbiased data is available for senior DoD managers;

• Address problems with the use of immature technologies by requiring the Director of Defense Research and Engineering to periodically review and assess the maturity of critical technologies and by directing the Department to make greater use of prototypes, including competitive prototypes, to prove that new technologies work before trying to produce them; and

• Address problems with costly changes in the middle of a program by tightening the so-called “Nunn-McCurdy” requirements for underperforming programs.

Excerpts from Bill Signing Ceremony Press Release – May 22, 2009


Impact of Acquisition Reform Legislation on Early Acquisition Policy

• Establishes Director, Systems Engineering (D, SE) and Director, Developmental Test and Evaluation (D, DT&E) as principal advisors to the Secretary of Defense and the USD(AT&L) on systems engineering and development planning and on developmental T&E, respectively

• Mandates documented assessment of technological maturity and integration risk of critical technologies for MDAPs during the Technology Development (TD) phase

• Establishes D, DT&E and D, SE joint tracking and Congressional reporting on MDAP achievement of measurable performance criteria

• Mandates competitive prototyping and MDA completion of a formal Post-Preliminary Design Review Assessment for all MDAPs before MS B; additional MDA certification to both at MS B

• Strengthens technical analysis of cost and schedule breaches during the Technology Development (pre-MS B) and the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (post-MS B) phases

Acquisition Lifecycle Comparisons

A B C

Materiel Solution Analysis

Materiel Development

Decision

PDR CDRPDR

Post-CDR AssessmentOr PDR after B

w/ Post-PDRAssessment

Engineering and Manufacturing Development

(Program Initiation)

Technology Development

Operations and SupportFRP

DecisionReview

Production and Deployment

Defense Acquisition Management System, December 8, 2008Defense Acquisition Management System, December 8, 2008

(Program Initiation)A B C

System Development and Demonstration Production and Deployment Operations and

SupportConcept

Refinement

ConceptDecision

Technology Development

Defense Acquisition Management System, May 12, 2003Defense Acquisition Management System, May 12, 2003

Full-RateProduction

DecisionReview

DesignReadiness

Review

A B C



Decision

PDR CDR

Post-CDR Assessment

Post-PDRAssessment


(Program Initiation)Technology

Development

Operations and Support

FRP DecisionReview


Defense Acquisition Management System, May 22, 2009Defense Acquisition Management System, May 22, 2009

CompetitivePrototyping

Technological Maturity and Integration Risk

Assessment


CBA

MS CMS BMS A

ICD TechnologyDevelopment CDD


CPDProduction and

Deployment O&SO&SMDD

MaterielSolutionAnalysis

Full Rate ProductionDecision Review

JCIDS ProcessCDR

DoD 5000.02 and PL 111-23 Change theEarly Acquisition Landscape

Renewed emphasis on manufacturing across the lifecycle


Decision (MDD)

PDR, PDR Report to the

MDA, and Post-PDR-

Assessment

System-level CDR with

an initial product

baseline and a Post-CDR Report to the MDA

Post-CDR Assessment by the MDA

between EMD sub-

phases

PDR

• What are the implications of these changes for programs and SEs?• How can systems engineering enable the program during this early phase?

CompetitivePrototypes

New 2366a & 2366b CertificationsLCSP


What This Means for Systems Engineers

• Systems engineering is now recognized in law as inherently necessary in requirements definition, development planning, and early acquisition

• Need for and focus of all engineering in the “pre-acquisition” phases (Materiel Decision Analysis and Technology Development) is dramatically altered:– Earlier engineering involvement (well before Milestone A)– More government expertise to plan for and oversee

requirements definition, technology maturation, and competitive prototyping leading to fully expressed system design (the allocated baseline) at the system-level Preliminary Design Review


New Challenges for Programs

• Need for Program Office formation and PM skill-sets after MDD and prior to MS A

• Increased importance of the Technology Development Strategy (TDS) (as a surrogate Acquisition Strategy) at MS A

• Schedule and funding shifts – EMD into TD

• Earlier engagement with industry and different contracting strategies for technology maturation, competitive prototyping, data rights, PDR before MS B, etc.

• Explicit need for earlier, formal SE process application (e.g., data, configuration, and risk management)


DDR&E Organization

Director, Defense Researchand Engineering (DDR&E)

Honorable Zachary J. Lemnios

Director, Research

Dr. David Honey

Principal DeputyDr. André van Tilborg

Director, Systems Engineering

Mr. Stephen Welby

Principal DeputyMr. Terry Jaggers

Director,Rapid FieldingMr. Earl Wyatt

Principal DeputyMr. Ben Riley

Director, DevelopmentalTest & Evaluation (DT&E)

Mr. Chris DiPetto(Acting)

Principal DeputyMr. Chris DiPetto

Defense AdvancedResearch ProjectsAgency (DARPA)

Dr. Regina Dugan

Defense TechnicalInformation Center

(DTIC)

Mr. Paul Ryan

Principal Deputy

Mr. Alan R. Shaffer


DevelopmentDevelopment Planning

DP (Early SE) SE

DT&ELCS

DP: Development PlanningDT&E: Developmental Test and EvaluationLCS: Life Cycle SustainmentSE: System EngineeringCBA: Capabilities Based AssessmentCDD: Capability Development DocumentCPD: Capability Production DocumentICD: Initial Capabilities DocumentMDD: Materiel Development Decision

A C

CBA

B

ICD TechnologyDevelopment

Engineering and Manufacturing

Development



MDD

CPDCDDO&S

FRPDRPDR CDR

New Emphasis on Development Planning and Early SE


Prototyping & Risk Reduction

Prototyping (Technology and Design)

CTE TRL Maturation

Trade Studies

SE Support for Technology Risk Reduction

Oversight of Competitive Designs

Risk Assessment

Input to Acquisition/

Planning, CARD, Budget & Other

SE in Contract Requirements

SE into the PDR Report to MDA, Acquisition Strategy, TEMP, CARD, and ICE

Evidence of Strong SE

Activity

PDR and PDR Report and Assessment

Technical Reviews up to and including PDR

Systems Engineering Plan

Strong Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM)

Inputs to Requirements

System Requirements Definition

RAM and Sustainability

Requirements Traceability Matrices

Translation of Requirements to Contract

Capability Development Document (CDD)

*Reference DAG Sections 4.3.1 and 4.3..2

CBA ICD Technology Development CDD Materiel Solution Analysis

A BMDD

Development Planning and Early SE Critical Activities

SE Input to MDD

Engagement in AoA

Engineering Analysis

CONOPS

Awareness of Strategic Context

Engagement with S&T

Engagement with JCIDS

Guidance

Plan

Analysis Activity

Report

Consideration of SOS/Interdependency, Interoperability Context

SEP for Milestone A

Input to TDS (CTE, CPI), TES, CCE

SE in TD Contract Requirements

Tech Reviews (ASR, Early SE Requirements)


The Milestone A Planning Challenge

Documents / activities / data requiring technical input from the Systems Engineer before Milestone A:

• Analysis of Alternatives• Technology Development Strategy

– Critical Program Information– Technology maturation plans– Competitive Prototyping plans– Net-Centric Data Strategy– Market Research– Data Management Strategy

• Component Cost Estimate• Systems Engineering Plan• Test and Evaluation Strategy

The PM’s Dilemma: Where to find the data!?


Why Is This Hard?

• Program offices (both government and contractor) have very little experience with pre-MS B systems engineering activities

• The DAG guidance is voluminous – online resource with over 750 printed pages in recent revision

• Program offices have limited understanding about interdependencies within the DAG guidance

• New implementing policy and DAG guidance in response to PL 111-23 will not be available immediately


New Challenges for SEPs

• Explicit technical planning for the Technology Development phase at Milestone A (and subsequent Milestones) including:

– Technology maturation – Competitive prototyping – Manufacturing readiness as assessed in Tech Reviews– Critical Program Information in design– Item Unique Identification (IUID) planning– Integration of RAM and HSI with SE– Role of Component Configuration Steering Board relative to requirements and

configuration management processes

• Mandatory system-level PDR before MS B for MDAPs and rationale for its placement before or after Milestone B for non-MDAPs

– PDR Report to the MDA either side of MS B– Post-PDR Assessment by the MDA for MDAPs or if PDR after MS B

• Mandatory system-level CDR– Post-CDR Report to and Assessment by the MDA followed by an ADM

• IUID Implementation Plan as SEP Annex at Milestones B and C


SE Policy & GuidanceSome Activities

• [Re] Adopted ISO/IEC Standards into ASSIST– 15288 [SE], 12207 [SWE, in progress], 16085 [Risk], 15939 [Measurement], 26702 [IEEE 1220]

• Reviewed ISO drafts – [[in JTC1/SC7 for Systems & Software Engineering]– 24748 [guide for Life cycle management, 24748-2 [guide to 15288[, – 29148 [Requirements engineering]

• Reviewed GEIA/EIA drafts– EIA-649 STD and HDBK– GEIA-Std-927

• Under development in SESS [DDRE/SE approves]– MIL-STD-189A Reliability Growth Management– Mil-Std-31000 Engineering drawings

• Other– Updated earlier cancellation of Mil-Std-973 to note that EIA-649 is a good alternative– Adopted ANSI/GEIA-STD-0009 [Reliability] – led update of SEMP DID; ready to be posted in ASSIST

• In process guide updates: SEP Prep, SE in Contracting, IMP/IMS, Risk Mgt, DAG/SE

INCOSE Northstar Chapter09/17/09 Page-0 UNCLASSIFIED

Other Design Consideration Guides

Other Standards &Mil Handbooks

DoD 5000.02

Chapter 4SE

Chapter 8Security

Defense Acq Guidebook

Planned

Extent

Acquisition Policy

Policy-specific guidance linked to . . .

. . . all other relevant

guidance

Data Flow:

Safety/ESOH Guides

Tech Review Guide

Contracting for SE Guide

SEP Prep GuideSE Slide Rule

FunctionalArchitecture

Development Guide

SOS SE Guide

RAM Guide

DM Guide

IMP/IMS Guide

Risk Mgmt Guide

MOSA Guide

CM Mil Hbk 61A

“Wall Chart”

WBS Mil Hbk 881

M&S Guidance

DoD M&S MgtDoDD 5000.59

DoD M&S VV&ADoDI 5000.61

EW and C2WCountermeasures

DoDD 3222.3

SafetyMIL-STD-882D

DoD IADoDD 8500.01E

Interoperability & Supportability of IT & NSS DoDD 4630.05

Systems Assurance Guide

DTM 08-048Supply Chain Risk

Management

PPPDoDI 5200.39

PPP Prep Guide

CPI Security Classification Guide

CPI Identification Tool

PP Contract Language

Compendium

RAM-C Rationale Report

Manual

Acq Security-RelatedPolicies & Issuances

Tool

SE Policy and Guidance Structure

http://www.acq.osd.mil/sse/pg/guidance.html


If any who review this presentation have

questions, feel free to contact Gordon Kranz at:

<[email protected]>

UNCLASSIFIED INCOSE Northstar Chapter 09/17/09 Page-1 Systems Engineering in DoD Mr. Gordon Kranz...

Documents

Transcript of UNCLASSIFIED INCOSE Northstar Chapter 09/17/09 Page-1 Systems Engineering in DoD Mr. Gordon Kranz...