Preparing Our Engineering Leaders: Workforce Development Initiatives

1. Preparing Our Engineering Leaders: Workforce Development Initiatives Dr. Don Gelosh Deputy Director, Workforce DevelopmentSystems Engineering / Mission Assurance Defense Research and Engineering Office of the Undersecretary Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics) 16 August 2010

2. Focus Areas for Systems Engineering:Improving the Department’s Engineering Practice Growing the Systems Engineering Workforce Improving SE Capabilities in the Defense Industrial Base Growing our Nation’s Future SE Workforce Our Focus: Policy, People and Practice

3. Workforce Development Technical workforce development initiatives across government, industry and academia: Competency Assessments for technical management career fields (“first look” in Q4 2010) Competency-based certification standards that enables “raising the bar” for workforce performance Flexible certification framework that encourages professional growth and provides the opportunity for subsequent progression to Program Management and Key Leader Positions Expanded collaboration with civilian universities and industry associations DDR&E/SE Serves as Functional Leader for over 44,000 Uniformed and Civilian Acquisition Personnel

4. Workforce Development Initiatives: Government • Competency Assessments/Surveys for Technical Management Career Fields (SPRDE-SE/PSE and PQM) • Key Leader Professional Development – Lead Program Systems Engineer • Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Strategic Plan and Implementation Plan Working Group • Mentoring Workshops and Tutorials – SE Conference in San Diego, 25 – 28 Oct 2010 • SE Workshops with Singapore (19 – 21 July 2010)

5. Workforce Development Initiatives: Industry • National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) SE Division Education and Training Committee • Identify defense industrial base SE workforce challenges • Explore how DoD policy and investments can aid in maintaining/growing critical capabilities • Explore how we can attract, foster and develop future DoD engineering leaders • With the increased focus on government in-sourcing, explore how we can rapidly mature future program chief engineers • International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) • Industry Certification Equivalencies • Certified Systems Engineering Professional – Acquisition (CSEP-Acq) • Associate Systems Engineering Professional – Acquisition (ASEP-Acq) • Expert Systems Engineering Professional – Acquisition (ESEP-Acq) • IS 2010 – Academic Forum & Youth and Outreach Forum (STEM)

6. Workforce Development Initiatives: Academia • Systems Engineering Research Center (SERC) Research Topics: • SERC RT – 1: Body of Knowledge and Curriculum to Advance Systems Engineering (BKCASE) • SERC RT – 4: Developing Systems Engineering Technical Leaders (with DAU) • SERC RT – 16: SE Experience Accelerator (with DAU) • SERC RT – 19: SE Capstone Courses (with AFIT, NPS, and Academies) • SE Education Workshops • First Undergraduate SE Workshop – US Air Force Academy (Apr 7 – 8) • AF SE Research and Education Network Workshop (Aug 16 – 17) • Fall Undergraduate SE Workshop Meeting (Sep TBD) • Spring Undergraduate SE Workshop (Apr – May TBD 2011)

7. First Undergraduate SE Workshop • Purpose: Examine the state of undergraduate programs in systems engineering (SE) in the US. • Attendees: More than 60 professionals from academia, government, and industry • Three goals: • Explore the characteristics, successes, and challenges of US bachelor’s degree programs in SE. • Build a sense of community among US faculty who provide undergraduate SE programs. • Develop high-level proposals for how to reinforce the strengths of those programs and address their challenges, thus increasing their value to students and prospective employers in a practical way.

8. Undergraduate SE Workshop: Summary of Observations We believe the state of US bachelor’s degree programs in SE can be characterized by the following eight observations: Strong Demand Distinction Lessens Over Time Real Engineers Systems vs. Domain Centric Distinction Is Fuzzy Industrial vs. Systems Engineering Top 4 Challenges Program Offices Are No Different

9. Undergraduate SE Workshop: Top 4 Challenges The top four challenges for successful undergraduate SE programs are: Understanding and meeting customers needs within curriculum constraints. Sustaining technical and societal relevance. Incorporating sufficient real-world problem solving into the curriculum. Enhancing identity-communications-community of practice.

10. Undergraduate SE Workshop: Next Steps (1) • Conduct research to understand the demand for systems engineers in the broad U.S. economy vs. the demand in the defense community. • Conduct research to understand the jobs that graduates with a bachelor’s degree in SE hold during their apprenticeship period, and to understand the relative performance of those with an SE degree and those with an engineering degree other than SE. • Conduct research to understand how many graduates of SE programs go on to become certified Engineers in Training and eventually certified Professional Engineers. Determine why graduates seek or forgo certification.

11. Undergraduate SE Workshop: Next Steps (2) • Conduct additional research to understand what SE is being taught in Domain Centric SE programs and where the graduates are being employed. • Hold a workshop to sharpen the understanding of the similarities and differences between Systems Centric and Domain Centric SE programs. • Hold a workshop to sharpen the understanding of the similarities and differences between Industrial Engineering and SE. • Hold a workshop to elaborate more fully on these challenges and develop a sharper roadmap to address them.

12. Key Leader Professional Development • Purpose: Ensure key leaders assigned to or selected for assignment to Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAP), Major Automated Information System (MAIS) programs and select special interest programs are properly qualified. • Ensure: establish/modify and manage qualification standards • Key Leaders: Those individuals assigned to or selected for assignment to a Key Leadership Position (as defined by DoDI 5000.66) within an MDAP, MAIS or select special interest program. • Assigned to or Selected For: assigned to means currently on the job; selected for means identified or designated to be assigned • Properly Qualified: possesses and demonstrates the appropriate competencies (behaviors, knowledge, skills, and abilities) necessary for assignments through experience, training, and education

13. What is a Properly Qualified Key Leader? • What does it take to be designated a Properly Qualified Key Leader? • Demonstration of a progression of greater responsibility, breath and diversity of experience in required competencies • Level III certification in one or more functional areas • Executive Leadership development / training • We need to target individuals with key leader potential (both military and civilian) (e.g., self nominated / board approved) • We need to actively manage development of this pool of individuals with key leadership potential

14. Who is Considered a Key Leader? • Program Executive Officer / Deputy Program Executive Officers • Program Manager (including Acquisition Category (ACAT) II Programs) • Deputy Program Manager • Lead Program Systems Engineer • Program Lead for Cost Estimating • Program Lead Contracting Officer • Program Lead Logistician (Product Support Manager) • Program Lead Business Financial Manager • Program Lead for Test & Evaluation • Program Lead for Production, Quality, and Manufacturing • Program Lead for Information Technology

15. The Way Forward for Key Leader Professional Development Identify the key multi-disciplinary competencies and level of demonstrated proficiency need by key leaders. Also identify any expert hard skill competencies and level of proficiency needed by the specific key functional leader to perform his/her function. Develop/Propose a career development model from start (intern) to finish (executive) that produces properly qualified key leader/ professionals possessing the right mix of competencies and proficiency. Evaluate current certification standards against the model and recommend changes to current training, education and experience (acquisition qualification standards, career development programs) requirements needed by key leaders and where in the certification process they should be inserted. Develop learning and career management assets needed to support recommended changes, identify resource requirements. Build a phased implementation strategy, low hanging fruit in 2011.

16. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Strategic Plan VISION: A diverse, world-class STEM talent pool with the creativity and agility to meet national defense needs. MISSION: Inspire, develop, and attract the STEM talent essential to deliver innovative solutions for the Nation’s current and future challenges.

17. STEM Strategic Plan: INSPIRE • INSPIRE: • A Nation of students, parents, teachers, and the public inspired to engage in STEM discovery and innovation. • OBJECTIVES: • Increase the awareness and importance of STEM and foster discovery and innovation. • Provide opportunities and resources for learning and personal growth that stress academics, knowledge, skills, abilities, and attributes required for STEM discovery and innovation. • Strengthen, expand, and enable communities of stakeholders to provide a continuum of formal and informal STEM programs and opportunities. • Directly engage populations underrepresented in STEM fields.

18. STEM Strategic Plan: DEVELOP • DEVELOP: • A future world-class STEM workforce talent pool. • OBJECTIVES: • Identify current and future STEM workforce needs. • Increase the diversity of participants in STEM programs. • Build a portfolio of DoD STEM programs to cultivate the desired competencies of the talent pool. • Increase the number of military personnel with STEM competencies that transition into the defense workforce.

19. STEM Strategic Plan: ATTRACT • ATTRACT: • A dynamic and innovative work environment in DoD that attracts and retains world-class STEM talent. • OBJECTIVES: • Identify programs and best practices that attract and retain world-class STEM talent. • Ensure a DoD work environment that attracts and retains world-class STEM talent. • Strengthen and promote the awareness of STEM-relevant opportunities within DoD.

20. STEM Strategic Plan: DELIVER • DELIVER: • A coordinated, collaborative and cohesive set of DoD STEM programs that inspire, develop, attract, and retain world-class STEM talent. • OBJECTIVES: • Develop a systematic approach to identify STEM education and outreach programs across the DoD components and agencies. • Provide and maintain a publicly accessible inventory of DoD STEM programs. • Implement a STEM inventory communications strategy.

21. NDIA SE Division Education and Training Committee • Our Tasking: • Identify defense industrial base SE workforce challenges. • Explore how DoD policy and investments can aid in maintaining/growing critical capabilities. • Explore how we can attract, foster and develop future DoD engineering leaders. • With the increased focus on government in-sourcing, explore how we can rapidly mature future program chief engineers.

22. Workforce Challenges • Increase the number who enter the SE discipline • Identify the right mix of competencies and capabilities in the SE workforce • Increase the speed at which systems engineers mature • Increase the ability to deploy systems engineers more optimally within organizations • Attract and retain high caliber engineering leaders

23. Recommended Actions • Continue supporting the DDR&E STEM Initiative • Support Co-Op/Intern Programs • Support Mentoring Programs • Support Rotational Assignment Programs • Provide more opportunities for workforce development between government and industry

24. Systems Engineering:Critical to Program Success Innovation, Speed and Agility