1 / 8

Transition Working Group

Explore obstacles in C4ISR/IT transitions, recommend systemic changes, and emphasize community engagement for successful technology deployments. Recommendations include non-traditional acquisition approaches and seeking operational value incentives.

zonta
Télécharger la présentation

Transition Working Group

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Transition Working Group Gerald Douglas

  2. Transition Working Group Team Members • Gerald Douglas, Lockheed Martin (Chairman) • Chris Behre, Old Dominion University • Randy Brooks, General Dynamics • Frank Creaser, UNISYS • Tom Gandy, General Dynamics • Greg Larsen, IDA • Terry Mayfield, IDA • Kathy McDonald, DARPA • Jane Powers, Lockheed Martin • Gary Wheatley, Evidence Based Research, Inc.

  3. Tasking • Review the obstacles to the rapid transition of successful experiments from any source • obstacles are fundamentally systemic • Recommend changes Tinkering at the margins will NOT take us where we need to go

  4. Environment • C4ISR Capabilities are based on IT technologies • Speed of technology advances far exceeds the ability of the process to exploit it • Infrastructures are integral to warfighting and C4ISR/IT in particular, but….

  5. Problem(s) • Process Bound in all aspects of the acquisition (rqmts, acq, funds, etc.) • Process never designed for C4ISR/IT acquisitions • No Central Authority for Transitions • Desired operational outcome’s should drive technology insertions • C4ISR trade-space must be more than technology alone

  6. Recommendations • C3I/CIO use existing authority to: • Establish that all C4ISR/IT-Based acquisitions shall follow a non-traditional acquisition approach permitted by 5000 Rewrite • Define model/process/controls (now until symp) • Vet it at Symposium/Workshop • Initiate it immediately afterward with a selected C4ISR system and Experiment

  7. Recommendations (2 of 2) • Identify a neutral organization and operations to receive, transition, and deploy through experimentation both successful and promising technologies • Require full community engagement (present AND accountable) • Establish operational and business led transitions • Establish/Fence funds (in/out) • Vet to interoperability criteria and drive “Standards” • Provide Operational Value Incentives for the adopting component through re-allocation/re-direction of funds.

  8. TRANSITION GROUP • DoD CIO DOES NOT HAVE ACQUISITION AUTHORITY • A NON-TRADITIONAL PROCUREMENT CAN BE ENCOURAGED BUT IMPLEMNTATION IS NOT THE CIO’S RESPONSIBILITY • TESTING IS THE LONG POLE IN THE TENT • CIO COULD ENGAGE (WITH DOT&E) IN SOME REVISIONS OF TEST REQUIREMENTS • THE ACTD PROCESS APPEARS TO BE FERTILE GROUND FOR STEAMLINING THE PROCUREMENT OF “GOLD NUGGETS.” • LIFE CYCLE SUPPORTMUST BE DEALT WITH. • NEED TO FIND A WAY TO MOVE GOLD NUGGETS INTO ACQUISITION WITHOUT BEING TIED TO THE POM CYCLE REV 1 2-29-00

More Related