Incremental Commitment Model
as Applied to DoD Acquisition
Insights from a Business Process Model of DoD
Acquisition Policy and SE Guidance
Dr. Judith Dahmann
The MITRE Corporation
1
Background
• Updates to DoD acquisition regulations (DoD 5000) are
underway
• Defense Acquisition Guide (DAG) (particularly SE
guidance) is being updated to address the changes in
acquisition regulation
• A Business Process Model of DoD 5000 and SE Guidance has
been constructed to provide technical support to this
process
Acquisition is a complex process requiring systems
thinking and SE analysis like other complex systems
2
DoD Acquisition Regulations and Guidance

The Materiel Development Decision precedes
entry into any phase of the acquisition framework

Entrance criteria met before entering phase

Evolutionary Acquisition or Single Step to
Full Capability
User Needs
Technology Opportunities & Resources
(Program
B Initiation)
A
Regulations
DoDI 5000.02
Materiel
Solution
Analysis
Technology
Development
Materiel
Development
Decision
Guidance
Defense
Acquisition
Guide
Post-CDR
Assessment
Pre-Systems Acquisition
= Decision Point
Ch
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
C
FOC
IOC
Engineering and
Manufacturing
Development &
Demonstration
Operations &
Support
Production &
Deployment
LRIP/IOT&E
Systems Acquisition
FRP
Decision
Review
Sustainment
= Milestone Review
Topics
Decision Support Systems
Acquisition Strategy
Affordability & Life-Cycle Estimates
Systems Engineering
Life Cycle Logistics
Human Systems Integration
IT & NSS
Intelligence
Test & Evaluation
Assessments and Reporting
Program Management
Context is worth 50 IQ Points
Focus of
current
activity
3
Draft Early Acquisition Policy Changes*
Early
Acquisition
MS A
MS B
MS C
JCIDS Process
Strategic
Guidance
Joint
Concepts
CBA
ICD
MDD
Materiel
Solution
Analysis
Technology
Development CDD
PDR
Materiel
Development
Decision (MDD)
Engineering and
Manufacturing
Development and
Demonstration
CPD
Production and
Deployment
CDR
O&S
Full Rate Production
Decision Review
PDR and a PDR report
to the MDA before MS B
(moves MS B to the right)
Competing
prototypes
before MS B
4
Coordination Draft, DoDI 5000.02
Why is this hard?
• Very little experience with current pre- Milestone B SE
guidance
– Makes it difficult to know what to ‘adjust’ given changes
• The current DAG guidance is voluminous
– Online resource with over 500 printed pages of information
without hotlinks
• Limited understanding about the interdependencies
among the guidance provided to the program office from
different perspectives
– Any added SE guidance will compete attention from already over
burdened program office
• Consequently, it was important to understand how SE fits
into the context of early acquisition
– What is the relationship between SE and guidance for other areas
Need a structured approach to understanding how
SE fits into larger context
5
Why Business Process Modeling?
• Business process modeling (BPM) rapidly articulates processes
and relationships
– Supports communication and common understanding among stakeholders
– Provides a means for understanding relationships among concurrent stakeholder
activities
• Information to update the DAG is closely aligned to
information for the pilot model; efficient leveraging of effort
• Objective is to support understanding of how SE fits into the
larger context of DoD 5000 and guidance
• An BPM model has been developed to address SE guidance in
context of regulations and other guidance ‘lanes’ addressing
– Proposed DoD 5000
– SE guidance (draft updates to DAG Chapter 4)
– Relationships between SE guidance and 5000 and guidance in other DAG
chapters (limited)
Model provides a framework to articulate the role and
relationship of early SE
6
Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN)
• Open standard maintained by the Object Management Group (OMG)
–
–
Allows organizations the ability to communicate processes in a standard manner
Facilitates understanding of performance collaborations and business transactions
between organizations (B2B)
• Numerous COTS vendors support BPMN
– AGM implemented using iGrafx Process 2007
• Allows for model Simulation, XPDL export (for sharing with other tools)
• AGM is a Process Model, not only a graphical flow chart, but process can be
analyzed and simulated
• BPMN graphical elements depict ordered sequence of business process
–
Notation designed to coordinate sequence of processes and message flows between
different process participants in a related set of activities
• BPMN Objects
–
–
–
–
–
Task (Rectangle): Activity, Process, Sub-Process
Event (Circle): Send/Receive Message, Start Event, End Event
Gateway (Diamond): Merge, Fork, Join
Information Flow (Dashed Line): Between Swimlanes
Process Flow (Solid Line): Within Swimlane
Task
Event
Gateway
7
Approach
• Iterative approach to building, reviewing,
applying the model
– Begin with a ‘first pass’ rapid development based on the
current 5000 documentation using ‘surrogate’ subject
matter expert (SME)
– Review ‘first pass’ model with SMEs
– Update (second pass), review and revise
– Conduct an initial assessment, review and revise in
collaboration with stakeholders
• Use model as a framework for enterprise level
exchanges
Version 1.0 if the model is in place and in use
Work in progress
8
5000
Notional Initial Model Layout
MS A
MDD
AoA
Planning
AoA
Conduct
AoA Review
& MS A Prep
MS B
Prototype Prototype Prototype Preliminary Prep for
Planning Conduct Assessment
Design
MS B
PDR
Development
CDR
Guidance
SE
Ch 4
JCIDS
Represent the SE actions, technical reviews, and products based on ESEWG drafts
Ch 1
Decision Support Systems
Ch 2
Acquisition Strategy
Ch 3
Affordability
Ch 5
Life Cycle Logistics
Ch 6
Human Systems Integration
Ch 7
IT & NSS
Ch 8
Intelligence
Ch 9
Test & Evaluation
Ch 10
Ch 11
Assessments and Reporting
Program Management
Other
9
Birdseye View of the Model
MS A
MDD
MS B
PDR
AoA
Best viewed as 4’ x 10’ version
Model provides a way to visualize MDD to MS B
10
Results
• Clear description of
– Key elements of new DoD 5000
– Relationship among the guidance across the DAG chapters
– Focus for SE Guidance during early phases of acquisition process
including
• A framework for ‘enterprise’ discussion
– Showing the numerous guidance ‘lanes’ and where they provide
guidance to an acquisition program
– Identifying issues in aligning guidance with changes in policy
– Establishing SE relationships with other guidance ‘lanes’
– Demonstrating SE contributions to acquisition process and work in
other lanes
• A mechanism for identifying and addressing issues e.g.
– SE best practices pre- MS A
– Impact of moving MS B to follow Preliminary Design Review
Model provides a framework to look at issues across
various guidance lanes
11
Example: Best Practices for MDD to MS A
MDD to
MS A
Slice
MDD
Upfront
Engineering
Analysis
MS A
• Provided basis for DAG SE guidance on
5000
JCIDS
SE informs
Decision
Documents
SE
SE &
AoA
• Key SE Activities
• Impact on program planning
Material Solution Analysis
JCIDS
AoA
Other
Lanes
MS A
MDD
Initial user
assessment
of capability
needs
ICD
Government
Program Office
Systems
Engineering
Engineering Analysis
of Preferred
Systems
Solution(s)
PSC
ITR
ASR
Study
Efforts
SEP
TES
Other
Government
Program Office
Activities
• Critical role for early program office SE
• Advise and review AoA
• Engineering analysis of recommended
solution for TDS technical planning
AoA
Guidance
Technical
Planning
for MS A
Areas
Depending
on SE input
AoA
Plan
TD RFP(s)
TD Plan
TDS
AoA
Report
Conduct
AoA
Key SE Activities, Events and Products and Their
Support to Program Planning
12
Example: Moving Milestone B to follow PDR
 PDR has been an SE event; change impacts a range of considerations
outside of SE
Preliminary
MS B
Design
DOD 5000.2
MS B
JCIDS
Inputs
• User Rqts (CDD)
• System costs
• Test considerations
• Program protection issues
• Mature technologies
• ……
SE
Chapter
4
Initial Design
of End Item
• Allocate
systems to
subsystems
• Sub system
specification
System level
requirements
PDR
Remaining
Chapters
Knowledge
To Inform
Design
System
Specification
(Type A)
SW Development
Specification
(Type B)
HW Development
Specification
(Type B)
Test Equipment
Development
Specification
(Type B)
MS B
Products
Products
Inputs needed to support design of the end item
are now produced as part of the MS B review
SW Product
Specification
Unit A Product
Specification
Unit B Product
Specification
(Type C)
(Type C)
(Type C)
Assembly 1 Process
Specification
(Type D)
Sub Assembly Material
Specification
(Type D)
Inputs
MS B
• User Rqts (CDD)
• Preliminary system costs
• Test considerations
• Program protection issues
• Mature technologies
• ……
System level
requirements
• Inputs to preliminary design
need to be provided during
TD
• The product of preliminary
design provides a knowledge
base for MS B products
Initial Design
of End Item
• Allocate
systems to
subsystems
• Sub system
specification
MS B
Knowledge Products
(Type A)
SW Development
Specification
(Type B)
HW Development
Specification
(Type B)
Test Equipment
Development
Specification
Unit A Product
Specification
Unit B Product
Specification
(Type C)
(Type C)
(Type B)
SW Product
Specification
(Type C)
Assembly 1 Process
Specification
(Type D)
Sub Assembly Material
Specification
(Type D)
Products
PDR
System
Specification
PDR


Preliminary
Design ‘Slice’
of Model
Design
Knowledge
To Inform
MS B
Model provided a framework for enterprise
level discussion
Identified key inputs needed prior to
preliminary design including
 User requirements, cost constraints, critical
technologies, critical protection items
Topic of a July workshop to address the
impact of the change across the guidance
13
lanes (e.g. DAG Chapters)
So what does this have to do with ICM?
• Basic tenets of the Incremental Commitment Model (ICM)
– Decision are made about an acquisition
•
•
•
•
incrementally at
key anchor points based on
evidence and
assessment of risk
• Past workshops have noted the gross similarity between
ICM and major DoD Acquisition milestones
– Misses the importance of smaller, incremental and iterative steps
• A review of the results of the current model of DoD policy
and guidance shows a series of cross lane, checkpoints
between major milestones
This ‘pattern’ in the model suggests a ‘natural’
application of ICM to Defense Acquisition
14
Patterns in the Model
• ‘Natural’ synchronization points from MDD to MS B
– Points at which input from across lanes support action
– Results of the action lead to feedback to each lane for next product
MDD
1
MS A
2
3
MS B
4
5
6
7
PDR
AoA
MDD
Mandatory
Entry to
Acquisition
Rec’d
Material
Solution
MS A Feasible
System
Design
System Level
Specification
Preliminary
Design
Wave pattern of interactions
MS B
15
Wave Patterns in the Model
• ‘Natural’ synchronization points from MDD to MS B
– Points at which input from across lanes support activity/decisions
– Results of the action lead to feedback to each lane for next product
MS A
MDD
1
MDD
2
Mandatory
Material
Decision
Rec’d
Material
Solution
3
MS A
MS B
4
Feasible
System
Design
5
System Level
Specification
6
Preliminary
Design
Series of points at which there are broad cross lane interactions
7
MS B
16
An Example: Feasible Design
Develop Feasible
System Design
Review
System Design
Users
Tech Maturity
Assessment
SE Plan
Design based on inputs from
other areas (‘Lanes’)
MDD
MS A
MS B
Results provide
input to other
areas (‘Lanes’)
Activities within
lanes then
process results
for input at 17
next point
Question…
• Are these patterns suggestive of ‘natural’ anchor points
ala ICM?
– Points at which your would do well to review evidence from
across the areas in the program to assess risk and make an
incremental decision about next steps?
• If so, what would you recommend to program
management office and systems of the appropriate
actions at these points?
What does this say about opportunities to
apply the tenets of ICM to DoD acquisitions?
18
Backup
19
Initial Model Scope Concept: Focus on Early SE
First phases of acquisition process,
subdivided into discrete stages
5000
Decision
Lanes
MS A
MDD
AoA
Planning
AoA
Conduct
AoA Review
& MS A Prep
MS B
Prototype Prototype Prototype Preliminary Prep for
Planning Conduct Assessment
Design
MS B
Development
PDR
CDR
SE
Ch 4
JCIDS
Ch 1
Represent the SE actions, technical reviews, and products based on ESEWG drafts
Decision Support Systems
Guidance
Ch 2 Acquisition Strategy
Ch 3 Affordability
Represent
5000 and
DAG
Chapter 4
in some
detail
Represent SE
‘inputs’ and
outputs
Ch 5 Life Cycle Logistics
Ch 6 Human Systems Integration
Ch 7 IT & NSS
Ch 8 Intelligence
Ch 9 Test & Evaluation
Ch 10 Assessments and Reporting
Ch 11 Program Management
Other
Include ‘other category for unknowns
Initially
represent
other
guidance
‘lanes’ as SE
sources and
sinks 20