Once the decision has been taken to explore shared data, the program will need to develop a Through Life Information Management (TLIM) Strategy. The process for achieving this is shown in Figure 1.3.4-1. Throughout this staged process all investment of resources must be driven by, and add value to, the business goals of the program.
The first task in the development of the TLIM Strategy is to translate the management vision of how the digital environment can bring benefit, into specific, measurable improvement objectives for the program over its life-cycle. This should be followed by a careful examination of the business and IT environment in which the program will operate, and an assessment of the options for adding value from an SDE. Alternative options are then examined in relation to their ability to contribute to achievement of business goals, using cost/benefit and risk management techniques.
The output from Stage 1 is a decision on which Through Life Information Management improvement opportunities the specific program should adopt, and an outline concept of the Program SDE. These activities should be undertaken in parallel, with progressive improvement of earlier analysis based on findings from subsequent work.
2.1 Develop Improvement Targets
No single program can realistically hope to pursue all of the possible improvement opportunities arising from modern IT. The selection of improvement targets, expressed in quantifiable and measurable terms, is the first key milestone in the NATO CALS Handbook process.
Some programs will already have a clear management vision of those aspects of performance they most wish to improve. This vision should direct their CALS activities. For others, development of this vision and identification of the improvement targets will require a wider analysis of options and the CALS environment, before selecting and quantifying targets.
Improvement targets should be expressed in simple, plain language that all program team members understand. Examples might include:
· Cut development time scale from release of Staff Target to first operational use by 30% from last similar project.
· Reduce cost of providing technical information needed to conduct level 1 and 2 maintenance by 40%, from the average of the last four programs.
· Reduce the number of QA deficiencies, found on final inspection to less than one a week.
Opportunities for improvement are numerous. A limited listing of improvement targets and opportunities, based on current best practice, is presented below. These are described in a generic form, and are intended to act as a starting point for selecting the specific improvement target that the DS program will seek to pursue. Ideally, selection of targets should be based on a full analysis of through life cost, risks and benefit applicable to the program in question. In practice, some intuitive judgment will be needed to select a limited range of options for analysis in further detail.
Likely areas for improvement include:
· Faster, cheaper development through improved communications and decision support.
· Reduced through-life costs through improved Configuration Management.
· Optimization of Maintenance Time, Cost and Quality.
· Just-In-Time Access and Delivery of Technical Information.
· Improved feedback of in-service experience.
· Real Time Access to NATO/Multi-national Logistic Information.
2.2 Analyze Environment and Options
Selection of improvement opportunities, and the design of the program SDE, are major decisions that will effect defense system cost and performance over the whole life-cycle. This section explains how to analyze the business and information technology options, to provide a background for rational choices.
2.2.1 Business Environment and Options
To develop a DS program "Through Life Information Management Strategy," it is necessary to understand and document those aspects of the program business environment that have relevance to information management. It is hoped that most of the necessary information will already have been identified and documented in existing strategies and plans.
2.2.1.1 External Environment
The business environment analysis starts by exploring the requirements and constraints placed on the program by external authorities, which the Program Manager is unable to change. Examples may include the requirements derived from the Validated Mission Need (e.g., required capability and availability), current policies, decisions already taken, and the requirement for international co-operation. This analysis establishes the boundaries within which improvements are possible.
2.2.1.2 DS Program Process Improvement Tool
After addressing the external environment, attention can then be focused on the opportunities for process improvement within the program itself. A Through Life Business Model (TLBM) provides a useful tool for describing and understanding the defense system program environment. The TLBM can be used to investigate alternative approaches:
· To structuring and managing program activities;
· To the extent of contractor support and the roles and responsibilities of contractors, during and after acquisition;
· To the relationship, and split of work between the defense system project and the Armed Forces who will operate and may support the system; and
· To the information requirements and flows that need to be managed over the life-cycle.
A generic defense system TLBM has been developed by NATO CALS to illustrate the improved business processes for through life management, enabled by a Shared Data Environment. (See Chapter 6)
2.2.1.3 DS Program Process Improvement Tool Tailoring
The NATO CALS TLBM defines a new approach to defense system management, showing how integrated product and support data contained in one single source could improve the process for acquiring, operating, supporting, and disposing of a defense system. It reflects many new ideas and improved ways of working, not all of which will be achievable on any single program. By tailoring this model to reflect the specific program, it is possible to explore and to illustrate how the digital environment can be exploited on the program in question.
Tailoring the NATO TLBM should be based on:
· The actual business environment in which the program will operate.
· Specific opportunities for improvement that the program wishes to explore.
By studying each activity box in the generic TLBM, it is possible to understand whether particular activities apply to the program in question, who is likely to perform them, and what improvements might be possible from an SDE. The use of a TLBM will also function as a "question generator" to identify issues deserving attention within the CALS Strategy and for the rest of the program. The NATO CALS TLBM is a guide, not a standard. Each Program Manager must decide which improvements to implement, and how to apply them in his context.
This tailoring and analysis process will also be of benefit to programs buying an existing system, whether military or Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS). The use of a TLBM will help clarify the strategy for supporting the system through life, the level of dependence on the intended supplier over the life-cycle and the opportunities for exploiting IT.
DS Program Analysis Key Questions
The TLBM should be used to analyze, in sufficient detail, the nature of the information required to support the intended way of working. The following are examples of questions that the model may help to resolve:
Program Management (See Chapter 6)
· How will key resources (money, people, and information) be managed?
· What are the roles, responsibilities of the many participants who will perform the various activities over the life-cycle?
· How might these change over time? How will such changes be managed?
· How are requirements kept current over the life-cycle?
· What kind of incentive arrangements would be most appropriate between the Government and industrial prime contractor?
· What teaming concepts are to be used?
· How will program changes be managed?
· How will the program be controlled?
Quality Assurance (See Chapter 6)
· How will baseline requirements be captured and managed?
· How will in-service effectiveness and feedback be managed?
· How will reliable historic records be maintained over the life-cycle?
Information Management (See Chapter 6)
· What information is to be managed?
· What form is it to be in?
· Who owns/manages/uses the information?
· What information should be shared, exchanged or integrated?
Configuration Management (See Chapter 6)
· How will product change be controlled (and linked to changes to the support)?
· How will changes to the product be related to requirements?
· How will (required/actual) product configurations be identified?
· How will current configuration data be provided to those who need it?
· How will configuration anomalies be reported and resolved?
Concurrent Engineering (See Chapter 6)
· What engineering methodology will be used (e.g., waterfall, spiral)?
· How will technical information be defined and kept current with product information?
· How will Integrated Logistics Support be implemented?
Multi-Disciplinary Work Groups (See Chapter 6)
· How are skills and resources from different organizations brought together to solve problems efficiently by joint inter-active working (physically/face to face meetings/virtual environment through SDE)/who will be the members?
2.2.1.4 DS Program Forecasting
During the early stages of the program life-cycle, it is difficult to forecast the long-term DS future with confidence. However, it is important from the program outset to consider the whole life-cycle. Failure to do so will close off or greatly increase the cost of significant future options for sustaining the defense system efficiently over the rest of its life. Nowhere is this more important than with defense system product information. In this area, there are huge opportunities for reducing life-cycle costs, by taking sensible and low-cost precautions from the program outset. This will ensure that later in the life-cycle, defense system support managers have the flexibility needed to manage their business efficiently in the face of a changing environment (e.g., the opportunity to re-compete for particular goods and services). A final output from the business environment analysis should be the identification of options for future improvements or changes in responsibility that the program needs to protect.
A summary of the information that needs to be recorded (or referenced) from the Business Environment analysis that lists the expected contents of the Program Strategy for CALS is presented below:
2.2.1.5 Content of Program Strategy for TLIM
Management Vision for exploiting the digital environment:
· Brief description of desired future working style.
· Evidence of top management commitment.
Selected improvement Targets:
· Specific Business Improvements that CALS is required to deliver on this program.
· Intended metrics and method of measurement.
Description of the Program Business Environment and Options:
· Program goals and priorities.
· Project policies, decisions taken, and time scale.
· Roles and Relationships through life:
PMO and Prime Contractor
PMO and Operational and Support agencies
Industry involvement through life
Multinational bodies - NAMSA, Co-operative Logistic Initiatives
Intentions for in-service Support: extent of contractor involvement:
Management of Updates
Competition vs. co-operation
IPR
Warrantees and Incentive mechanisms
· Options to be maintained
· Agreed description of the DS life-cycle, presented as a TLBM
· Issues requiring attention in NCOPS Stage 2
IT Environment Assessment
· Extent of digital working
· Relevant legacy systems
· Relevant IT trends
· IT policies and plans
· Experience of other programs
· Available software tools (now and future)
SDE Options for the Program
(Consider 3 options - maximum, "best," minimum)
· Extent of SDE
· Expected Capabilities
· Who will have access
· Boundaries and Interfaces
· Ownership
· Control
· Impact on Processes
· Impact on People
· Evolution over time
Assessment of Options: Costs, Benefits, and Risks
· Program life-cycle cost model (need to assess options)
· Value added by target improvements
· Costs of SDE (do not forget people, software, maintenance, etc.)
· Risks: Technical, Cultural, process Change etc. How much change can we manage?
· Evolution vs. revolution
· Outline risk management plan
Program Intentions for CALS (Decisions)
· Intentions for digital working
· SDE options for further development
Intangible Benefits
· "Top program management is aware of the opportunities presented by digital data."
· "Everyone in the program knows what is intended for CALS, and what it is expected to deliver."
· "Program staff begin to understand life-cycle management."
· "Program staff starts to view information as an asset, to be manage over time."
2.2.2 IT Environment and Options
The second activity within Stage 1 is an assessment of the external CALS environment, relevant to the particular program. This should include consideration of:
· Relevant legacy systems - industry, government, Armed Forces
· Relevant IT trends
· Government IT policies and plans
· Recent experience of other programs
· Available software tools, now and in the future
An area of particular importance is the existing and planned DS program Information Technology (IT) capabilities for both governmental and industrial partners. Even though these change over time and are moving targets, when developing a CALS Strategy for a specific program the following key areas should be assessed:
· Availability of terminals, now and in future
· Level of experience with digital working
· Telecommunications capabilities
· Interoperability requirements
· Current and proposed future standards
· Security
· Legal/contractual aspects
· Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)
This analysis, enhanced by the business analysis, may be used to develop a steadily improving picture of the intended extent of digital working to be applied to the program. This, in turn, begins to define a set of options for the scale, extent, and capability of the Shared Data Environment that the program will seek to deploy. Areas to be addressed include, but are not limit to the following:
· What information is required, by whom and when over the life-cycle?
· What will they do with it?
· How much of the data will be generated, accessed and manipulated in digital form?
· To what degree will business still be conducted on paper?
· To what extent does an SDE already exist for the program?
· What are the options for improving or extending this?
· Who will have controlled access to the new SDE?
· Who owns and operates the SDE, during the acquisition phase and subsequently?
· How will the SDE be financed?
· How will the SDE be managed?
Specific attention should be given to the boundaries of the SDE. Complete and free access to program data, as assumed by the TLBM, is some years away from reality due to industry proprietary, data and security issues. In practice, no single program SDE will encompass all of the program participants. Limitations must be set on the extent of shared information access. Every boundary drawn for the SDE will create a border across which information will need to be exchanged. DS Program SDE chosen boundaries determine the information exchange requirements with the rest of the world.
In exploring the CALS environment, and the possible SDE options, particular attention should be paid to the recent experience of other relevant programs. The NATO CALS Office provides a natural focal point for such learning through its attendance at international conferences and contacts with participating nations. The Internet is also a valuable CALS information source through the various home pages maintained by the national CALS offices. Several relevant periodicals and other publications are also starting to appear, some free of charge.
Although these documentary sources are of significant value, programs developing a CALS Strategy are encouraged to visit other program offices and/or industrial sites that have recent relevant experience.
The contractual aspects of alternatives developed through analysis and tailoring of the TLBM and the CALS Environment for the program should be considered at the earliest possible time given the complexities of international contracting and through life support of NATO/Multi-national armament programs. A more complete discussion of contracting issues is covered in Chapters 4 and 10.
2.3 Analyze Cost and Benefits
Defense Program Managers are under enormous pressure to reduce program costs. They are also expected, at the same time, to raise productivity and product quality by improving business processes. The Information Technology (IT) revolution offers a significant potential for improvement. However, demonstrating the potential gains is difficult for several reasons:
· The cost of current activities is often poorly understood, or not available,
· There is limited experience with advanced technology, and,
· In the past, many programs made significant progress through CALS, but did not formally document their improvements or their costs.
Fortunately, the IT revolution is now sufficiently mature to provide many examples of worldwide successful implementations in the defense industry and beyond. As a result, it is now possible to develop a realistic business case for specific CALS investments based on practical experience.
By far, the most important criteria for pursuing the implementation of the CALS Environment are the tangible benefits derived from the investment required to implement and use it. Many of these benefits are not realized in the beginning of a program and are accrued over the DS life-cycle. The risks associated with the CALS Environment must also be considered on a through life basis and mitigated through appropriate risk management. There is no standard prescriptive model for predicting the costs, benefits and risk management for the application of a CALS Environment to a NATO/Multi-national program due to the uniqueness of each program and the IT Infrastructures available for the program.
Tables 2-1 and 2-2 provide an overview on the general categories of cost, benefits, and risks associated with the application of the CALS Environment and concepts to a program. Further specific details are provided in Appendix H, List of Possible CALS Improvement Targets.
The tailoring of the TLBM and the application of the CALS environment to the program needs will be based on what is available and affordable and, therefore, on the results of the Cost and Benefit analyzes for the program. The method of measuring and confirming the required improvements should also be addressed. With suitable planning, the SDE itself can be used to collect the data needed by the assessment criteria by capturing the actual program costs and performance improvements on an ongoing basis. This information may be used to modify the CALS Environment over the life-cycle and to justify any subsequent investment required for further improvement. Such data would also provide valuable feedback to NATO and the nations by contributing to the growing pool of knowledge.
Table 2-1 Cost Benefit Life-cycle Matrix
COST BENEFIT LIFE CYCLE MATRIX
Feasibility |
Define/Design/test (tested solution) |
Production (products, processes and services) |
Deployment |
Operations |
Disposal | |
Concurrent Eng/ILS |
+ Need more people |
+ Need more people |
0 Same amount of work |
- |
- |
- Disposal is engineered into technical solution |
Shared Data Environment |
- Electronic form and digital data (if it exists) saves money here |
- Information sharing |
- Supplier Chain management, production driven by digital data |
- Data is digital and on time (JIT?) integrated for use, maintenance and training. Requirements |
- Data maintenance/mgt is "immediate," technical workers are alleviated from being knowledge clerks |
+ Easier and more accurate identification of data holdings for disposal |
Program Management (PM) |
- Phase review and approval compression in new CALS PM acquisition environment saves time, people and money |
- Phase review and approval compression in new CALS PM acquisition environment saves time, people and money |
- Phase review and approval compression in new CALS PM acquisition environment saves time, people and money |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Multi-Disciplinary Groups (acquisition) |
+ More people, more difficult to manage |
- Solution sooner |
- Produceability inherent in design |
0 |
0 |
+ An MDG for disposal would have to be formed |
Quality Assurance (QA) |
0 |
0 Quality is built in from start, so fewer design changes, no savings from QA yet |
- Meets requirements, testable and fewer rejects/failures |
- It works as specified, more frequently |
- Meets specified supportability requirements, and operability requirements. more frequently |
0 No additional savings identified against continuous QA |
Configuration Management (CM) |
0 Start CM is a CE environment but not much gain |
+ Started earlier, MDG in control, baseline management is more complex |
0 Shop floor not impacted positively or negatively but integrated CM |
- Integrated incremental rollout |
- Manage configuration items for improved support and change mgt. |
- Find disposable items and corresponding data easier |
Table 2-2 Cost Benefit Risk Assessment
Objectives |
Benefits |
Risks (of doing CALS) |
Risk Management | |
SDE |
Version Control
|
Electronic form
|
System security
|
Security is still and issue - manage it: firewalls, encryption, minimize conversion, standardize data formats (esp. new data)
|
MDT |
A fully integrated technical solution |
Sooner, reduced cost, higher quality |
Takes longer
|
Schedule management
|
CM |
Baseline control
|
Vastly improved product management throughout the life-cycle |
Volatility of changes and baseline, complexity of new systems
Dependency with ILS |
SDE, change management, change tracking from common database managing end item relationships MDT ILS/CM integration |
CE
|
Supportability
|
Reduced defects
|
Initial investment does not achieve cost results, diminished war fighting capability |
Information engineering done at same time of h/w and s/w engineering in a SDE using multi-disciplinary groups |
QA |
Continuous quality measurement, cost/performance trade-offs |
Fewer rejects/failures and therefore less rework costs |
CALS got it there sooner for it to fail more frequently
|
QA/PM dependency for requirements tracking and management. PM responsible for pulling it all together |
PM |
Schedule compliance, cost compliance, quality, CDRL approval/reviews |
Accelerated, incremental approvals |
Empowered MDGs and contractual aspects too complex to manage |
PM representation on MDTs and management training |
2.4 Decide Through Life Information Management Strategy
Once the various cost, benefit and risk analyzes have been conducted for each of the alternative business and IT solutions, the Program Manager can complete the Through Life Information Management Strategy by defining the program intentions for using digital data. The contents of the TLIM Strategy are defined in Section 2.2.1.6, Content of a Program Strategy for TLIM, and summarized briefly below:
· Program Management Vision
· Improvement targets for the program and assessment metrics
· Business Environment and Options
· IT Environment Assessment and SDE Capabilities and Options
· Cost and Benefit Analysis
· Risk Assessment and outline Risk Management Plan
· Program Intentions for CALS (Decisions)
The TLIM Strategy in this section describes the CALS Environment the program intends to develop and implement for use throughout the DS life-cycle. A properly developed TLIM Strategy will lay a firm foundation for Stage 2 - The Development of a Through Life Information Management Plan. This in turn will provide the basis for establishing the contractual requirement for information to support the intended ways of working over the rest of the DS life-cycle.
