MINUS Stakeholders
TEAM UGS – Shirin Aminifar, Eddy Gerenski, Amin Mehr
SYSTEMS 798 – Fall 2008
Contents
1.
Stakeholder Identification..................................................................................................................... 2
1.1.
Stakeholder Definition ................................................................................................................. 2
1.1.1.
Government Stakeholder Definition ....................................................................................... 3
1.1.2.
Military Stakeholder Definition ............................................................................................... 3
1.1.3.
Civilian Stakeholder Definition ................................................................................................ 3
1.1.4.
Sponsorship ............................................................................................................................. 4
1.2.
Stakeholder Interviews ................................................................................................................ 4
1.2.1.
Product Insight ........................................................................................................................ 4
1.2.2.
Architecture Insight ................................................................................................................. 5
1.2.3.
Deliverables ............................................................................................................................. 5
1.3.
Stakeholder Value Mapping ........................................................................................................ 5
1.4.
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) ........................................................................................... 8
List of Figures
Figure 1 – Stakeholder Community .............................................................................................................. 2
Figure 2 – Stakeholder Value Scale ............................................................................................................... 6
Figure 3 – Stakeholder Weights .................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 4 – Stakeholder Value Mapping ......................................................................................................... 7
Figure 5 - MINUS QFD ................................................................................................................................... 9
1
1. Stakeholder Identification
The UGS team identified MINUS stakeholders by analyzing stakeholder behaviors, separating
stakeholders into several categories, determining their benefits/interest areas, weighing interests and
priorities, and developing a strategy to market for the different categories of stakeholders. After
stakeholder identification, the UGS team conducted interviews to determine needs, prioritize the
members of the stakeholder community, and evaluate key business drivers or mandates.
1.1.Stakeholder Definition
The UGS Consulting team defined stakeholders by dividing them into the following categories:
Government, Military, and Civilian. Figure 1 shows the three categories of stakeholders and the groups
that belong to each category. All of these stakeholders were selected by analyzing the service that
MINUS will provide and the benefits that it will offer to these stakeholders.

Government – Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Congress, and U.S Customs and Border
Protection (CBP)

Military – Armed Forces

Civilian – Law Enforcement, Homeowners, State/National Park Services, and Building Owners.
Figure 1 – Stakeholder Community
2
1.1.1. Government Stakeholder Definition
MINUS will help Government personnel prevent the illegal entry of persons and goods between the
official ports of entry into the US. According to the Wikipedia, the Secure Fence Act was signed in
October 2006 in order to prevent terrorist and terrorists’ weapons from entering the United States. This
act mandates that a $49 billion fence be built between US and Mexico by December 2008. Some of the
most notable benefits that MINUS will offer to these stakeholders include the following:

The $49 billion fence between US and Mexico many not be necessary to be built

Decreases/stops the flow of aliens and drugs into the United States.

Reduces the number of agents on duty (the government currently deploys over 15,000 Border
Patrol Agents and 745 Air and Marine Interdiction agents)

Reduces cost while providing security 24-7 without rest or nourishment
1.1.2. Military Stakeholder Definition
MINUS will help armed forces such as the Army by increasing their military situational awareness and
improving their force protection. Some of the most notable advantages that MINUS will provide to these
stakeholders include the following:

Advanced opposing force detection

Autonomous surveillance not effected by human/physical limitations

Low cost blanket coverage areas

Limited emplacement time – “throw and go”
1.1.3. Civilian Stakeholder Definition
MINUS stakeholders want to develop a product that is low cost allowing us to market this system not
only to Government and Military stakeholders, but to civilians in several commercial markets. The
MINUS system will be able to detect threat in parks, homes, buildings, etc. and some of the many
stakeholders that will benefit from this system include Law Enforcement, Home owners, State National
Park Services, and Building Owners.
3
1.1.4. Sponsorship
In addition to the MINUS stakeholders that will be using the system in the different markets, we have a
sponsor Jeremy Tucker who represents self interest in UGS. He is a senior analyst working for Integrity
Applications Inc. (IAI) and has a background in Measurement and Signature Intelligence (MASINT) and
surveillance. He has professional experience with unattended ground sensors and remote sensing
technologies. His interest in this project is to further understand the future of mote technologies in the
UGS community. We have been interviewing with him and his colleagues to determine the needs in the
government and military market.
We also have a GMU sponsor, Professor Chang who will provide us with feedback as we develop the
requirements and preliminary design of the MINUS system.
1.2.Stakeholder Interviews
1.2.1. Product Insight
Team UGS met with analysts from Integrity Applications Inc (IAC) and a couple U.S Army
lieutenants from Army Material Command (AMC) who directly support and/or are interested in using
UGS for force protection, US and Mexico border surveillance, or who have interest in the overall UGS
market place. These interviews took place several times. The purpose of these interviews was to further
understand the stakeholder interests and focus the MINUS project around their needs. These
interviews also allowed stakeholders to understand future UGS requirements and needs. The initial UGS
project was based on Government and Military stakeholders so the intent of reconnecting with them
was to ensure that the team in alignment. Overall the stakeholders were pleased with the direction the
UGS team was taking however they did have some critical comments and suggested direction.
U.S Army and analysts from IAC were primarily interested in a new product that is cost effective
and utilizes sensors with large arrays to cover a large geographic area. Stakeholders were more
interested in these requirements than adding new sensor technology or “plush” features that go beyond
basic operation. The key limitation to a lot of these stakeholders was limited number of systems and
sensors they can deploy. In addition to the limited quantity was the expense and risk of retrieving the
systems in denied areas. The typical UGS system can easily be stolen from the US – Mexico border
before patrol units have time to react. The loss of one sensor in the current UGS systems can cost over
$50,000.
UGS stakeholders interviewed also included parties interested in Military force protection in
forward combat areas. These stakeholders expressed interest in the size and cost of the sensor with less
emphasis on the total number of sensors and effective range. The key scenario these stakeholders
presented was hostile urban environments where military forces could utilize these low cost sensors to
maintain security on cleared areas. The stakeholders were interested in the relay node communicating
back to mobile troops via handheld device or a device worn by troops (i.e. a pager).
The stakeholders interviewed for the MINUS project included contractor support staff with
experience as operations engineers and operations specialists with a vested interest in unattended
ground sensors in support of the US DOD and DHS. The stakeholders are active users of UGS who have
4
experience in acquisition, emplacement, surveillance, training, test and evaluation. The opinions
expressed are based on their view of the UGS market place and their specific interests. This stakeholder
survey was very influential because of the broad customer base this group interfaces with.
Although we interviewed with Government and Military personnel who had a vested interested
in UGS technology, we did not interview members of Congress, DHS, or the CBP. We analyzed these
markets and made some assumptions based on the government and military stakeholders we
interviewed. We also spoke with some homeowners and building security guards in order to make
some assumptions about the needs of the stakeholders in our commercial market.
1.2.2. Architecture Insight
Overall the Government and Military stakeholders were pleased with the selected DODAF
architecture and wanted us to continue to structure the project around DoD frameworks. The DODAF
structure is preferred because the majority of the stakeholders involved are government entries that
understand this methodology and can easily adapt any of our deliverables into their programs.
Additional stakeholder information pertaining to architectures and processes is found in the Process and
Architecture sections.
1.2.3. Deliverables
Stakeholders are interested in a concept design level deliverable that will provide insight into a
potential future UGS product. The final deliverables should highlight potential technologies, market
insight, business case, applicable hardware and software, and custom designs that could potentially fill
this capability gap. The final deliverables should also discuss the overall feasibility of this effort, what
requirements cause stovepipes and/or are limited by available technologies. In the end stakeholders
should feel confident in funding and pursuing this type of product through the proper development
phases, or understand why this effort would not be a worthwhile investment at this time.
1.3.Stakeholder Value Mapping
At the conclusion of the first set of stakeholder interviews, the UGS team developed a draft of the
stakeholder value mapping model. The value mapping model was developed by identifying the needs of
identified stakeholders/markets at stakeholder interviews. This value mapping will be updated
periodically as we continue to interview our stakeholders and make necessary adjustments to their
changing needs. Currently, the main needs for users of the MINUS system were identified as the
following:

Affordability: A cost effective solution that will detect intrusions

Surveillance: 24-7 autonomous surveillance not effected by human/physical limitations

Provide Notification of intrusion: Awareness of threat to prevent intrusion or to seek protection

Archive Intrusions: System shall store a history of illegal activities allowing users to view and run
reports on previous activities
5

Monitor Activities: System shall allow users to monitor real time maps and images of areas of
interest

Safety: Safety against personal or territorial threats

Operational Activities: System shall allow an efficient and easy way for users to activate sensors.

Verify User Authentication: System authenticates users through a user interface
After identifying the needs, the UGS team developed a value scale to rank each need. The value scale
ranges from 0 (not needed) to 4 (critical). If a need is assigned a value of 4, then it is absolutely
necessary to have for stakeholder satisfaction. If the rating is a 2, then the need is really not necessary
but it’s a “want,” something that is nice to have but not needed. If the value of the need for a
stakeholder is 0, this means that the particular stakeholder does not value this need while others might.
Each stakeholder depending on their objectives has different priorities and therefore different needs.
Value Scale
4
The feature is critical for stakeholder satisfaction
3
The feature is highly recommended for stakeholder satisfaction
2
The feature is nice to have but not necessary.
1
The feature provides minimal value but not necessary.
0
The feature provides no added value to stakeholder
satisfaction.
Figure 2 – Stakeholder Value Scale
Weights were also assigned to each stakeholder, from most important stakeholder to least important.
The below figure shows that Armed Forces and CPB are the primary stakeholders that the MINUS team
is focusing on and Homeowners and ourselves MINUS Independent Research and Development are the
least significant. We are targeting the Armed forces and CBP military and government markets,
therefore they are our key stakeholders.
Stakeholder Weights
4
4
3
3
Armed Forces
US Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
Congress
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
2
1
1
Commercial - Law Enforcement, Homeowners, Parks, and
Building Owners
Homeowners
MINUS Independent Research and Development (IRAD)
Figure 3 – Stakeholder Weights
6
After determining the stakeholder weights, needs, and value scale, the following MINUS Stakeholder
Need Analysis Matrix was developed. Relative weights were calculated for each need. The most critical
needs for stakeholders was Need #3: Awareness of threat to prevent intrusion or to seek protection and
Need #10: Affordable. The MINUS Team will ensure that these needs are heavily taken into
consideration when designing the MINUS system.
MINUS Stakeholder Need Analysis Matrix
Needs
Relative Weight
MINUS IRAD
State/National Park Services
Building Owners
Homeowners
Law Enforcement
Armed Forces
Congress
US Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
Stakeholders
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Need #
1
User authentication/security
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
87
2
Provide Notification of illegal activity
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
87
3
Awareness of threat to prevent intrusion or to seek
protection
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
88
4
Display lat/lon coordinates of activity
3
3
4
4
3
0
1
1
3
63
5
Archive intrusions
3
3
3
3
3
0
2
2
3
59
6
Maps and images that display real time activity
4
4
4
4
3
0
3
3
4
78
7
24-7 autonomous surveillance not effected by
human/physical limitations
4
4
4
4
3
1
2
3
4
77
8
Manually Activate Sensors
3
3
4
4
3
0
2
3
4
70
9
Sensors cover large geographical area
3
3
4
4
2
1
1
3
4
67
Affordable
Long Battery Life
4
3
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
3
4
3
4
4
4
4
88
77
10
11
Figure 4 – Stakeholder Value Mapping
7
1.4.Quality Function Deployment (QFD)
After developing a high level Stakeholder Value Mapping, the UGS team developed a QFD to
help link the needs of stakeholders with the design, development, engineering, manufacturing and
service functions of the MINUS system. The QFD enabled the MINUS Independent Research and
Development (IRAD) team to better understand customer requirements. It also allowed us to gauge the
customer’s needs to develop a strategy to stay ahead of the game so that we are the leading innovators
of the intrusion detection sensor system. We developed a QFD to better understand our customer’s
needs and decide what features to include. We used mazur.net1 as a resource to understand the
importance of a QFD and obtain guidance on how to create a QFD.
After multiple stakeholder interviews we developed use cases that tied to the stakeholder needs and
determined the following as top features that government and military stakeholders were interested in:

Wireless Technology – Utilizes wireless technology so that the systems can be set up in the
middle of the field

Ease of Use – User friendly MINUS software where minimal training is required for it’s users

Security – Secure login and authentication into the MINUS software

Long Battery Life – Long lasting battery life so that maintenance could be limited

Affordable – Cost varied with stakeholders, but all were looking for something that is more
affordable then what is available in today’s market

Durable – The sensor system will work in extreme cold and hot conditions

Large Footprint – The sensors will cover a large geographic area

Adaptable – Can be created using COTS products and users can receive messages via pagers,
PDAs, computers, or any other device with built in wireless technology

Small/Not detectable – Is not easily detected by enemies

Accurate and real-time notifications – Provides real-time notifications in order to react quickly
to threats
These demanded qualities were listed in the QFD. We assigned weights to each government
stakeholder requirement (demanded quality), 1 being the least important and 3 being the most
important. We also developed some functional requirements to address each of the customer’s
requirements. Using the QFD template, we determined relationships and correlations in order to
calculate the maximum relationship values and the relative weights of each customer requirement.
1
http://www.mazur.net/
8
Figure 5 - MINUS QFD
9