Author Archives: naustin

arj-80-cover

ARJ 80 | January 2017 Contents


To print a PDF copy of this issue, click here. Individual articles can be printed from the posts themselves.

ferreiro-200From the Chairman and Executive Editor

arj-jan-17-article-1-thumb

Survey of Small Business Barriers to Department of Defense Contracts

 

 

 

 

arj-jan-17-article-2-thumbUsing Heuristics for Supportability Analysis of Adaptive Weapon Systems in Combat

 

 

 

 

arj-jan-17-article-4-thumbThe Threat Detection System That Cried Wolf: Reconciling Developers with Operators

 

 

 

 

arj-jan-17-article-3-thumbIncreasing Army Supply Chain Performance Using an Integrated End-to-End Metrics System

 

 

 

 

arj-jan-17-article-5-thumbScandal and Tragedy? Or Acquisition Lessons Relearned by the F-35 Program

 

 

 

 


To print a PDF copy of this issue, click here. Individual articles can be printed from the posts themselves.

arj-80-lead-5

Scandal and Tragedy? Or Acquisition Lessons Relearned by the F-35 Program


To print a PDF copy of this article, click here/


Col Roger Witek, USAF (Ret.)

Major defense acquisition programs historically have had difficulty controlling cost, maintaining schedule, and attaining performance due to various acquisition strategy challenges. Likewise, with previous joint aircraft programs (F-111, V-22, T-6) and now with the F-35 program, challenges associated with Balancing Requirements, Harnessing Technology, Demanding Commonality, Evoking Concurrency, and Encouraging Partnering have affected schedule, cost, and performance outcomes. This article summarizes the triangulated research analysis on the comparison of previous joint aircraft acquisition programs, the mining and coding of government agency/think tank reports and scholarly journals on the F-35 program, and the mining and coding of questionnaires given to subject matter experts working on the F-35 program. It argues that the F-35 program has relearned some old lessons and learned some new ones, and it makes recommendations on joint aircraft acquisition strategies for the future to avoid the perception of scandal and tragedy. Continue reading

arj-80-lead-3

Increasing Army Supply Chain Performance Using an Integrated End-to-End Metrics System


To print a PDF copy of this article, click here.


Fan T. Tseng, Laird Burns, James T. Simpson, and David Berkowitz

Army Materiel Command and the University of Alabama in Huntsville partnered to develop an integrated end-to-end performance metrics system. The integration includes data pulls from multiple data systems into a metrics calculation and aggregation system that generates strategic performance metrics such as Customer Wait Time (CWT), with capabilities spanning from bottom-up supply chain performance aggregation capabilities to in-depth traceability to source (tactical) level data and documents. To support the best national defense, we must ensure that our warfighters receive the supply support they need in a timely and efficient manner. Supporting this effort requires a near-real-time system that measures and reports on supply chain strategic performance characteristics such as CWT. Data integrity is an integral part of the process, as is reaching common agreement on appropriate data sources, algorithms to calculate metrics, and the design of a visual dashboard that supports leadership decisions and performance evaluation, with drill-down capability for lower level decision making. Continue reading

arj-80-lead-4

The Threat Detection System That Cried Wolf: Reconciling Developers with Operators


To print a PDF copy of this article, click here.


Shelley M. Cazares

The Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security use many threat detection systems, such as air cargo screeners and counter-improvised-explosive-device systems. Threat detection systems that perform well during testing are not always well received by the system operators, however. Some systems may frequently “cry wolf,” generating false alarms when true threats are not present. As a result, operators lose faith in the systems—ignoring them or even turning them off and taking the chance that a true threat will not appear. This article reviews statistical concepts to reconcile the performance metrics that summarize a developer’s view of a system during testing with the metrics that describe an operator’s view of the system during real-world missions. Program managers can still make use of systems that “cry wolf” by arranging them into a tiered system that, overall, exhibits better performance than each individual system alone. Continue reading

arj-80-lead-2

Using Heuristics for Supportability Analysis of Adaptive Weapon Systems in Combat


To print a PDF copy of this article, click here.

Samuel H. Amber

The new U.S. Army vision contends that heuristics are practical tools for achieving innovation. Overcoming complex terrain and adaptive hybrid threats in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan requires technological innovation. Supportability issues result from modifying deployed weapon systems with new technology for countering these types of threats. Collecting detailed data on deployed weapon systems is constrained in combat zones. A solution for modeling supportability requirements of adaptive weapon systems in a constrained data environment involves heuristics. This modeling effort is achieved by modifying a decision matrix to include heuristics as an alternative field data source.   Continue reading

arj-80-lead-1

Survey of Small Business Barriers to Department of Defense Contracts


To print a PDF copy of this article, click here.

Ronnie Schilling, Thomas A. Mazzuchi, and Shahram Sarkani

A key tenet of the Better Buying Power initiatives is to increase small business participation in Department of Defense contracting. The department has had mixed success in retaining small businesses and meeting small business contracting goals. Results of a survey given to 681 small business leaders show many factors commonly exist that prevent small businesses from pursuing defense contracts. Some factors are more common than others, with the most cited factors related to a lack of communication from government leads or to the government taking too long to give approvals and make decisions. Statistical evidence also supports the perceptions, of smaller and newer small businesses, that the defense business is more challenging for them than for their larger and more experienced competitors. However, this turned out to be the case for only a subset of the factors we explored. Continue reading

arj-79-ferreiro-lead

From the Chairman and Executive Editor


To print a PDF copy of this article, click here.

Dr. Larrie D. Ferreiro

Chairman Larrie FerreiroThe theme for this edition of Defense Acquisition Research Journal is “Thinking Small in Order to Think Big,” as many of the articles drill down into the important details of processes and procedures in order to develop larger lessons for defense acquisition. The first article, “Survey of Small Business Barriers to Department of Defense Contracts,” by Ronnie Schilling, Thomas A. Mazzuchi, and Shahram Sarkani, examines the factors that small businesses see as inhibiting them from pursuing defense contracts, which Better Buying Power specifically attempts to encourage. They found that lack of communications and long timelines for approvals and decisions were some of the most important reasons cited by small business leaders. The next article, “Using Heuristics for Supportability Analysis of Adaptive Weapon Systems in Combat,” by Samuel H. Amber argues that, given the difficulty of obtaining supportability data on deployed weapon systems that often have been modified for combat, incorporating heuristics as an alternative field data source in the decision matrix can improve the development of supportability requirements. Continue reading

atl-january-2017-header

Defense AT&L January – February 2017 Contents


To print a PDF copy of this issue, here. Individual articles can be printed from the posts themselves.

atl-jan-17-kendall-thumbAdventures in Defense Acquisition

 

 

 

 

atl-jan-17-article-1-thumbStakeholder and Process Alignment

 

 

 

 

atl-jan-17-article-2-thumbBridging the “Valley of Death”

 

 

 

 

atl-jan-17-article-3-thumbEVM System’s High Cost Fact or Fiction?

 

 

 

 

atl-jan-17-article-4-thumbA Practical PM Guide to Requests for Equitable Adjustment

 

 

 

 

atl-jan-17-article-5-thumbGetting the Capabilities Right

 

 

 

 

atl-jan-17-article-6-thumbThe Seven Lethal Acquisition Diseases

 

 

 

 

atl-jan-17-article-7-thumbRequirements Management

 

 

 

 

atl-jan-17-article-8-thumbTake a Deep Dive With DAU

 

 

 

 

atl-jan-17-article-9-thumbRedefining the “Can Do” Attitude

 

 

 

 

atl-jan-17-article-10-thumbAuditing Organizational Security

 

 

 

 

atl-jan-17-article-11-thumbOSD Logistics Fellowship—A View From Above

 

 

 

 


To print a PDF copy of this issue, here. Individual articles can be printed from the posts themselves.

atl-jan-17-kendall-lead

Adventures in Defense Acquisition


To print a PDF copy of this article, click here.


By Frank Kendall

frank-kendall-headshotFor what is likely to be my last communication to the acquisition workforce as Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD[AT&L]), I thought I would share with you a few stories, all true, from my 45 or so years working in various aspects of defense acquisition, either in uniform, as a civil servant, in industry, or as an appointee. I’ve put them more or less in chronological order, starting with an experience I had while serving in Europe during the height of the Cold War. There has certainly been a lot of water under the bridge since then, and a lot has changed, but the things I’ve learned along the way are in many cases timeless. Continue reading

atl-jan-17-article-1-lead

Stakeholder and Process Alignment


To print a PDF copy of this article, click here.


By Eva Regnier, Ph.D. , Robert W. Barron, Ph.D. , Daniel A. Nussbaum, Ph.D., and Kail Macias

Technology Transition Programs (TTPs) are an important tool for facilitating technology transfer from science and technology (S&T) development to operational adoption in the Department of Defense (DoD). TTPs for weapons systems and platforms have formal processes to smooth and speed the path to operational adoption. By contrast, for technologies targeted at installations, there are some special challenges in formalizing the transition process. This article outlines some of the TTPs currently being used in the DoD and proposes a general framework for adapting their best practices to the larger TTP community. Continue reading