FORT BELVOIR, Va. (Oct. 6, 2014) — Next Monday marks 25 years since then-Chief of Staff of the Army Gen. Carl E. Vuono approved the creation of the Army Acquisition Corps (AAC), a specially trained, dedicated group of military and civilian acquisition leaders who develop, field and sustain the critical systems and services that enable our Soldiers to fight and win our nation’s wars. Not surprisingly, the Army acquisition community is celebrating in a big way.
To commemorate the silver anniversary, the U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center (USAASC), along with the Army acquisition community, has launched a campaign focused on people—the more than 12,000 members of the AAC. This cadre of hardworking professionals has even garnered presidential recognition.
“Bearing a burden heavier than any the rest of us may ever know, our service members deserve the utmost support our Nation has to offer, and our military and civilian acquisition leaders help meet this sacred promise to our soldiers,” said President Obama in his written message to the AAC on Oct. 1 for the 25th anniversary. “As Commander In Chief, I thank our dedicated acquisition leaders for their remarkable service.” Read the entire message.
A dedicated anniversary webpage, hosting the president’s message and one from retired Gen. Vuono, is designed to increase awareness for what the AAC is and does. The site features original documents; an interactive, multimedia timeline allowing users to explore the history of the corps; signature news articles throughout 25 years; and more than 20 “shout out” videos from the Army acquisition community and its most senior leaders. Don’t miss the highlight reel featuring clips from all the videos on USAASC’s YouTube playlist.
“Thank you, to each and every one of you for what you do on a daily basis,” said the Hon. Heidi Shyu, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT)), in her shout-out video. “The work you perform enables this Army to be the best Army in the world.”
The site also includes “25 for 25,” an opportunity to meet 25 members of the AAC in recognition of 25 years of Army acquisition excellence. This small sample of the more than 12,000-strong AAC highlights the diversity, talent, experience and professionalism that exists across the corps. From advanced medical research to rocket science to small arms to contracting and logistics, Army acquisition professionals research, design, develop and deliver the capabilities that Soldiers need to dominate on the battlefield.
In recognition of 25 years of Army acquisition excellence, meet 25 members of the Army Acquisition Corps (AAC). These 25 professionals are a small sample of the more than 12,000-strong AAC highlighting the diversity, talent, experience and professionalism that exists across the corps. From advanced medical research to rocket science to small arms to contracting and logistics, Army acquisition professionals research, design, develop and deliver the capabilities that Soldiers need to dominate. The AAC is a specially trained, dedicated cadre of nearly 8 percent military and 92 percent civilian acquisition leaders averaging 18 years of acquisition experience. AAC members have earned more than 7,000 advanced degrees and nearly 400 doctoral degrees. On top of all that, all members are required to meet annual certification requirements.
The group of 25 AAC members provides an everyday, behind-the-scenes look at this specially trained, dedicated cadre of acquisition leaders—nearly 8 percent of them military and 92 percent civilian—who average 18 years of acquisition experience. Together, AAC members have earned more than 7,000 advanced degrees and nearly 400 doctoral degrees, in addition to meeting annual acquisition certification requirements.
From Oct. 6 to 17, the celebration continues online through video messages, posts and even trivia on social media platforms throughout the acquisition community that can be tracked using hashtag #AAC25.
Additionally, the October-December edition of Army AL&T magazine is dedicated to the workforce and the AAC’s 25th anniversary. Army AL&T is the quarterly professional journal supporting the ASA(ALT), comprising in-depth, analytically focused articles.
“Along with the larger Army Acquisition Workforce, the AAC is the premier developer of the materiel solutions needed for a strategically responsive force,” writes Shyu in her October-December Army AL&T column, 25 Years and Counting. “In establishing the AAC, the Army professionalized the acquisition workforce, defining career trajectories for military and civilian acquisition workers with clear expectations for education, training, experience and assignments that promote competence and skill among the workforce.”
The signature event commemorating the anniversary, hosted by Shyu and the Director of Army Acquisition Career Management, Lt. Gen. Michael E. Williamson, is scheduled to take place at 3 p.m. Oct. 13—the very day marking the 25th anniversary—at the Army exhibit during the Association of the United States Army Annual Meeting and Exposition in Washington, D.C.
USAASC is a direct reporting unit supporting the Army’s acquisition mission through personnel development systems and management support capabilities. One of the core functions includes managing the AAC and the Army Acquisition Workforce, including career management and development.
FORT BELVOIR, Va. (Oct. 7, 2014) — As part of its celebration of the 25th anniversary of the Army Acquisition Corps (AAC), the U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center (USAASC) is hosting a contest for best “shout-out” video.
In celebration of the silver anniversary of the AAC, leaders and teams across the Army acquisition community recorded 25 videos of congratulations and thanks to the members of the AAC. Among the senior leaders included are the Hon. Heidi Shyu, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT)), Gen. Dennis Via, commander, Army Materiel Command, the ASA(ALT) Principal Deputy, Mr. Gabriel Camarillo and the Principal Military Deputy, Lt. Gen. Michael E. Williamson, and several deputy assistant secretaries of the Army and program executive officers.
Videos are available for viewing on the 25th anniversary web page and through the USAASC YouTube channel. Viewers can join in the anniversary celebration by “voting” for their favorite video.
Voting in this case will be by “engagement” rate. That means that the USAASC team will judge which video is the best based on numbers of likes, shares and views on the site and on social media, such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. The contest runs Oct. 7–13 and the “winning” video will be announced Tuesday, Oct. 14.
“We know that the quality of our people is an essential ingredient to our success as an acquisition enterprise.”—Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Dr. Ashton B. Carter
The Army Acquisition mission is to provide our Soldiers a decisive advantage by developing, acquiring, fielding and sustaining the best-equipped Army the world has ever known. Accomplishing that feat requires a dedicated workforce of career civilians and military professionals. This year, we celebrate 25 years of acquisition excellence, marking the creation in 1989 of the Army Acquisition Corps (AAC), the civilian and military specialists who develop and procure the myriad capabilities the Army employs for its mission.
Spc. Jackie Tackett, an automated logistics specialist for the 349th Quartermaster Company, California Army National Guard, drives a rough terrain container handler March 23 at Kandahar Airfield, Afghanistan. The Army also faces rough terrain as it plans for the future, because of budget uncertainty. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. 1st Class Jon Cupp, 82nd Sustainment Battalion – U.S. Army Central Command Materiel Recovery Element Public Affairs)
Led by the Army acquisition executive, program executive officers (PEOs) and program managers, this dedicated team supports the Soldier with the critical systems and services that enable our Soldiers to fight and win our nation’s wars. Along with the larger Army Acquisition Workforce, the AAC is the premier developer of the materiel solutions needed for a strategically responsive force. Our acquisition professionals consistently manage the delicate balance of delivering capabilities while serving as good stewards of taxpayer resources. To celebrate this milestone achievement, we are highlighting the contributions of the workforce in this issue of Army AL&T magazine.
When conceived in the late 1980s, the AAC was envisioned to professionalize the workforce needed to achieve the best value for the taxpayer while fielding the best equipment. Such a workforce would incorporate uniformed personnel to better understand military and operational needs for materiel and services. The AAC was created to bridge generating force processes with the operational force needs it serves, and it has performed this role with remarkable success.
In establishing the AAC, the Army professionalized the Acquisition Workforce, defining career trajectories for military and civilian acquisition workers with clear expectations for education, training, experience and assignments that promote competence and skill among the workforce. As DOD recognized in the Better Buying Power initiative, a professional workforce has been instrumental to success in an environment of constrained resources. There is simply no substitute for informed, rational business judgment at every level of our workforce. The AAC, by design, has expertly exercised such judgment throughout a critical time.
Annette LaFleur, team leader for the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center’s Design, Pattern and Prototype Team, uses a 2-D design program, but she is excited about the possibilities that 3-D printing capabilities hold for her industry and for Soldiers. Quick prototyping with 3-D printing—or additive manufacturing—is just one of many dimensions to the work that the Army Acquisition Workforce does for the benefit of the Soldier and the nation. (U.S. Army photo by David Kamm)
The greater Army Acquisition Workforce has approximately 38,000 members worldwide. It pulls together professionals from across Army organizations, including PEOs, the U.S. Army Materiel Command, Space and Missile Defense Command, Test and Evaluation Command, Medical Command and numerous others. Army Acquisition professionals are engineers, scientists, logisticians, contract specialists, testers, program managers and cost estimators, among other specialties.
This broad array of skill sets is necessary to effectively manage the myriad programs, both existing and nascent, that the Army must have to maintain its dominance—and do it all in a budget environment that demands we do more with less. While resources are shrinking, our threats are not. The Army’s research, development and acquisition resources have reached historic lows, and we must maximize the efficient use of these finite assets because our Soldiers are depending on us. The choices we make today will affect and shape the capabilities we provide to future generations of Soldiers.
1st Sgt. Justin Rotti, a combat developer from the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command’s Fire Cell, Fires Center of Excellence, uses a developmental handheld precision targeting device during a test at White Sands Missile Range, NM. Testing is among the many vital functions that acquisition personnel perform. (Photo by John Andrew Hamilton, U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command)
Army Acquisition is emphasizing several goals: First, we’re focusing on long-range planning, making sure that we make acquisition decisions with sustainment costs in mind. We’re also focusing on the quality of our dedicated contracting workforce, professionals who must amass years of experience to be optimally effective. Our science and technology portfolio is another area of focus, as the Army protects its seed corn for future capabilities.
As the Army is called to protect the nation against emerging threats, Army Acquisition will support that mission with advanced technologies, equipment and services. Acquisition must continue to encourage and develop our greatest resource—our people. We are fostering that growth in our workforce with planned initiatives such as tuition assistance, rotations with industry and increased recognition for outstanding workforce members. My personal mission is to ensure that the Acquisition Workforce grows the right skill sets to meet our challenges—and continues for another 25 years and beyond to demonstrate excellence in supporting the warfighter and the taxpayer.
As I celebrate the accomplishments of the AAC, I want to take a moment to recognize and remember one of its most exceptional members. MG Harold J. Greene exemplified the very best of the Army. He was a Soldier of incredible talent, tremendous intellect, and unwavering fidelity and devotion. An officer without pretense, he acted in the best interest of those entrusted to his command, earning the respect of his superiors, subordinates and peers. He possessed a great sense of humor and forthright demeanor. Harry was an American hero who could have chosen many paths in life. But it was his love of country and his family’s legacy of service that led him to join the greatest Army the world has ever known, and he was dedicated to ensuring that our Soldiers are equipped with the very best. He was proud to serve and dedicated his life to the Army.
This article was originally published in the October – December 2014 issue of Army AL&T magazine.
FORT BELVOIR, Va. (Nov. 3, 2014) – Lt. Gen. Michael E. Williamson, Army director, acquisition career management (DACM), discusses his approach to talent management in the latest Workforce Minute video from the U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center (USAASC). His approach includes “several initiatives to help our leaders identify and develop talent” within the Army acquisition workforce.
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.Williamson established a talent management team within the Army DACM Office at USAASC earlier this year, which he charged with instituting enterprisewide acquisition talent management for the civilian and military workforce.
“Talent management is focused on creating a pool of the right people, with the right skills for the right jobs,” said Diane Murtha, from the talent management team. “As proponency experts, our job is figuring out how we identify these individuals early on and how to develop them from their current position to serve as future leaders.”
In the video, Williamson cites several ongoing initiatives, including creating new civilian career models, expanding mentoring and evaluation processes, developing materials designed for new workforce members, broadening rotational and developmental assignments, and more.
In closing, Williamson stresses the importance of leaders and individuals when it comes to talent management. “Successful talent management requires both leader and individual accountability, and the sustainment of our Army Acquisition Corps depends upon the investment we make in our professionals today,” said Williamson.
Workforce Minute is a series of short, informative videos produced periodically by USAASC to provide relevant, career-related news for the Army Acquisition Workforce. Look for more career-related news at http://asc.army.mil/web/dacm-office.
WASHINGTON (June 1, 2015) – The Principal Military Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT)), Lt. Gen. Michael E. Williamson, announced the second annual Maj. Gen. Harold J. “Harry” Greene Awards for Acquisition Writing competition today to encourage critical writing focused on Army acquisition issues.
“It is important that members of the acquisition workforce and other interested individuals drive the dialogue about meeting and overcoming challenges in delivering capabilities to our Soldiers now and in the future,” said Williamson. “This writing competition was created to allow members of the acquisition community to tell their own stories to internal and external stakeholders.” The competition is open to everyone and seeks maximum participation, especially by members of the defense acquisition workforce.
The inaugural competition launched in June 2014 and resulted in 114 submissions from across the defense acquisition workforce, including all services and several commands worldwide. The entries were judged by a panel of experts ranging from retired general officers, industry experts, journalists and defense acquisition leaders. The 2014 winners and honorable mentions were published in a supplement accompanying the April 2015 edition of Army AL&T magazine. The winners were also honored at the U.S. Army Acquisition and Contracting Awards ceremony held in Huntsville, Alabama, last April.
“I was very impressed by the quality of papers submitted in the first competition,” Williamson said. “In my mind, the real winners of this competition are the Army, the acquisition profession, and the many people who read these essays and benefit from the insights, experience, thoughts and recommendations.”
Authors may write articles, opinion pieces, or essays from 500 words to 1,800 words on U.S. Army acquisition in one of four categories including acquisition reform/Better Buying Power; future operations; innovation; or lessons learned.
The submitted works must be unclassified, original, not previously published or submitted to a writing competition, and completed during fiscal year 2015. Four award winners will be selected, one in each category with four additional works selected for honorable mention. The deadline for submissions is midnight Aug. 16, 2015, to usarmy.pentagon.hqda-asa-alt.mbx.acq-writing-awards@mail.mil. Additional information about the competition is found at http://www.army.mil/asaalt, including the ‘call for submissions’. The winners will be recognized at the annual U.S. Army Acquisition and Contracting Awards ceremony to be held in late 2015, and their submissions along with the honorable mentions will be published in Army AL&T magazine.
The acquisition writing competition is named for Maj. Gen. Greene, the Deputy Commanding General of the Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan, who was killed by an Afghan Soldier Aug. 5, 2014, while making a visit to Marshal Fahim National Defense University in Kabul, Afghanistan. He was interred at Arlington National Cemetery on Aug. 14, 2014.
“Harry Greene was a Soldier, a leader, a mentor, and a friend who inspired all of us to tackle complex problems on behalf of Soldiers,” Williamson said. “I can think of no better way to honor Harry’s 34 years of distinguished service than by having this award named for him.”
By Ms. Karen Kurtz, ASA(ALT) Strategic Communications
WASHINGTON (June 2, 2015) – The Principal Military Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT)) and Director, Acquisition Career Management, Lt. Gen. Michael E. Williamson, today said that he wants to hear from military and civilian members of the Army Acquisition Corps and greater Army Acquisition Workforce (AAW) about how they honor the oath of office each day.
“Whether military or civilian, we all began our careers by taking an oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution.” Williamson said. “I want to hear from our acquisition professionals about how they honor the oath of office each day.”
He is inviting AAW members, individually or collectively as teams, to record and submit 15 to 30 second videos that answer the question, “How do you honor the oath of office each day?” Pictures and collages with captions, as well as short written statements are acceptable as well.
“Our professionals work hard to serve the American people and the Soldiers who defend them,” Williamson said. “They live and honor the oath each day. This AAWHonorsTheOath campaign is another opportunity to showcase their amazing stories.”
Second Lt. Lisa Bynoe, Army Reserve officer at Fort Totten, N.Y., administers the oath of re-enlistment to Sgt. 1st Class Bobbie Cox (right), Feb. 28 at the Women in Service for America (Photo Credit: HQDA Army Army.mil)
ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, Md. — The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology) received an update on the Army’s latest work in creating modular, customizable systems for various Army platforms during a visit here June 16.
The Hon. Heidi Shyu toured the Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center to gain a deeper understanding of CERDEC’s Hardware/Software Convergence initiative.
The Hon. Heidi Shyu, the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology), speaks with Dr. Paul Zablocky, CERDEC I2WD director, to learn more about CERDEC’s Hardware/Software Convergence initiative at APG, Maryland June 16. (U.S. Army CERDEC photos by Kristen Kushiyama)
CERDEC is working to modernize and modularize Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, or C4ISR, and Electronic Warfare components so that there is a standard interface to better and more quickly facilitate the integration, compatibility and interoperability of new capabilities.
Shyu said she would like to see the Army get to the point where it is not completely “lighting up the battlefield” in terms of digital signatures and systems; however, she also stressed program affordability and making sure hardware/software convergence does not become just a redesign of pre-existing systems.
During more than a decade of war, the Army built technologies to fill a specific need or to stop a threat. Interoperability between systems led to duplicative equipment such as multiple antennas or GPS units on the same platform.
The Hon. Heidi Shyu, the ASA(ALT), toured a CERDEC lab to learn more about the center’s Hardware/Software Convergence initiative at APG, Maryland June 16.
“In the past we weren’t telling industry enough specifics; we weren’t specifying enough with regards to the architecture, the standards and how you play in our Army network,” said Henry Muller, CERDEC director. “With this Hardware/Software Convergence approach we are going to be specifying the actual environment in which your capability is going to exist.”
Historically, the process of developing new systems became a series of addressing specific threats with specific systems.
“Adversaries constantly evolve, and new ones appear; we may not face the same threats in five years,” Seth Spoenlein, CERDEC S&TCD associate for Technology, Planning and Outreach said. “The Army must provide the latest capabilities to our Soldiers in the presence of the fast pace of technology, the environments our Soldiers are operating in, and the capabilities of our adversaries that our Soldiers face.”
“Our job at CERDEC is to ensure that we’re providing those cutting-edge technologies to Soldiers that best support their mission, regardless of platform,” said Spoenlein.
Decreasing the time it takes to get the proper technology to the Soldier will take a change in the way the Army seeks solutions.
CERDEC has proposed the Army move forward on the center’s Hardware/Software Convergence initiative, which would decrease the size, weight and power consumption of systems on a platform. CERDEC wants to achieve a decrease in SWAP by using a chassis and card system, which allows users to use common hardware elements but easily change software based on mission.
CERDEC will look at the tools and the integrated development environment in which it can create that capability to achieve interoperability in systems and increase the speed and agility necessary to shorten the upgrade process to respond to threats, Muller said.
“This particular Assistant Secretary of the Army is interested in the technical details, and these visits offer an opportunity to really explain to her, technically, what it is that we are doing,” Muller said. “It gives the CERDEC the visibility at that level in terms of the capabilities and what we are here to provide the Army, and what we are capable of providing the Army- the value that we bring to the entire acquisition process.”
CERDEC leadership and engineers demonstrated concepts and proposed solutions for decreasing the size, weight and power consumption of systems while still allowing for system-upgrade flexibility.
“Today the waveform is specific to that system, but we want to take and move code from one hardware platform to another,” said Dr. Paul Zablocky, director, CERDEC Intelligence and Information Warfare Directorate.
“We’re building on prior Navy and DARPA science and technology investments to develop leap-ahead technologies that provide seamless and cooperative operation of RF systems. The time is right to change the way C4ISR/EW systems are engineered and integrated onto platforms,” Zablocky said.
The Hon. Heidi Shyu, the ASA(ALT), toured a CERDEC lab along with CERDEC Director Henry Muller, CERDEC S&TCD Director John Willison, and CECOM Deputy Director Gary Martin.
Systems such as the Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System, or SINCGARS, and Counter Remote Controlled Improvised Explosive Device (RCIED) Electronic Warfare, or CREW, Duke V3 could leverage similar components reducing the systems to a common chassis with cards that address specific needs.
“This concept is designed to be rugged and very modular. It can go on all types of platforms, and we can break the chassis up into smaller pieces based on the platform,” Zablocky said. “The systems will be capable of automatically switching from application to application to make its use seamless for the Soldier.”
Hardware/Software Convergence would eventually allow for efficient system and component upgrades as new and better technologies emerge.
“We won’t be forced to change everything at one time. We can replace parts instead of having to change out the whole system. For example, as technology progresses, we can take out a less capable card and replace it with a better, upgraded card,” Zablocky said.
CERDEC leadership acknowledged the shift in business process might take time.
“I think we pushed our goals, and as usually the case our goal line was moved a little bit by the ASA(ALT). In other words, we were challenged to achieve more, which is always a good thing. We accept that and will move forward collectively with the PEO (Program Executive Office) to address what Ms. Shyu asked us to look at in addition to what we are already doing,” Muller said.
The Army has many systems that have similar components but different applications. Overlap in components can lead to too much size, weight and power consumption on Army platforms. CERDEC has proposed the Army move forward on the center’s Hardware/Software Convergence initiative, which would decrease the size, weight and power consumption of systems on a platform.
The Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center is part of the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command, which has the mission to develop technology and engineering solutions for America’s Soldiers.
RDECOM is a major subordinate command of the U.S. Army Materiel Command. AMC is the Army’s premier provider of materiel readiness–technology, acquisition support, materiel development, logistics power projection and sustainment–to the total force, across the spectrum of joint military operations. If a Soldier shoots it, drives it, flies it, wears it, eats it or communicates with it, AMC provides it.
Acquisition is all about requirements, and it’s the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) that is responsible for them—peering into the future through the lens of present-day circumstances to decide in what direction, and with which capabilities, the Army needs to go in order to continue being the best-equipped and best-trained force the world has ever known. But if requirements are the bricks of acquisition, then it’s the Army Capabilities Integration Center (ARCIC), part of TRADOC, that provides the mortar by developing concepts and capabilities, evaluating proposed Army modernization solutions, and integrating these capabilities across the areas of doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel and facilities.
MG Cedric T. Wins Director, ARCIC Requirements Integration Directorate
That’s why Army AL&T magazine reached out to MG Cedric T. Wins, director of the ARCIC Requirements Integration Directorate. ARCIC has the job of figuring out what the Army needs to defeat future adversaries and how it needs to get from concept to capability to make that happen.
“Everything starts with requirements,” said Wins, who assumed his current position in May 2013. Before coming to ARCIC, he served as the deputy commander for police and the joint program executive officer for the Afghan Public Protection Force Advisory Group, NATO Training Mission – Afghanistan and Operation Enduring Freedom.
During his 30 years of service, Wins has held command and staff assignments in field artillery units in the 7th Infantry Division, the 2nd Infantry Division and the 4th Infantry Division. Additionally, he has served in assignments with the HQDA and joint staffs. He holds an M.S. in management with a concentration in quantitative analysis from the Florida Institute of Technology, an M.S. in national security and strategic studies from the National War College, and a B.A. in economics from the Virginia Military Institute. He is a graduate of the Field Artillery Officer Basic and Advanced courses, the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College and the Operations Research Systems Analysis Military Applications Course.
We spoke with Wins during a June 5 interview that included the themes of discipline, collaboration and “the art of the possible.” Wins outlined the best way for the acquisition community to understand and execute the requirements that ARCIC articulates, and the mechanisms that ARCIC uses to support the acquisition community in interpreting them. One component of that is rehearsal of concept (ROC) drills—bringing together ARCIC, the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology (ASA(ALT)) and the G-8 and G-3 staffs at HQDA for a complete review of failed and successful programs to determine what mistakes were made, where they occurred and the role that policies and procedures played.
Wins also discussed the differences in developing requirements for materiel versus those for services and training, and the importance of involving the acquisition workforce in the requirements process, “to ensure that we have some of [the acquisition community’s] best and brightest come and spend a little time on the operational side.” Thus each side can learn from the other, and both can better understand how a decision made early in the requirements process affects the acquisition community later.
Wins noted the importance of ensuring continued modernization despite declining funds. He emphasized the need to be efficient and disciplined, saying that the Army has to figure out what it wants and how to deliver it, “because we can’t get everything.”
Army AL&T: Thanks for talking with us. A requirements-themed issue of Army AL&T magazine without ARCIC would be all uniform and no Soldier.
Wins: I appreciate the opportunity just to have a dialogue and talk to you all, and do what I can to answer some of your questions, to try to enlighten not only myself but perhaps some readers down the road. You know, having done this job over the last two years, it really has been an eye-opening and learning experience for me, particularly coming from the side of the Army that I was on previously, which has the responsibility to resource our requirements. So with that, I appreciate the opportunity. Hopefully, I can shed some light on some things based on what I’ve learned here over the last couple of years. And hopefully I can give you some answers that will be suitable.
Army AL&T: How can we, as the acquisition community, do the best job to understand and execute the requirements that the ARCIC articulates?
Wins: On all sides of the coin, we understand that everything starts with the requirement. That, then, leads to a discussion about how we resource it and then, of course, with the acquisition community doing the work that they need to deliver a material solution. It’s about delivery of systems—often material delivery of a system. And in that kind of triad, there are other folks integral in our ability to deliver capability as well—the test community, for example.
That type of work, building a capability from a requirement, probably only gets done best in a collaborative fashion. And so on our side, we’ve been trying to do some things to try to improve the requirement side of the process, and we have to work to continue to discipline ourselves on our requirements. We develop our requirements coming from learned experience from the operational community; also, from having dialogue and discussion with the acquisition community—the S&T [science and technology] side of the acquisition community to learn what’s possible—and then also with industry to gain a better understanding of what they’re doing that might provide solutions to our capability gaps.
COLLABORATION BLUEPRINT SSG Joshua Blake from the Army’s 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment briefs leaders of the U.S. Army Tank Automotive Research Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC) on the final day of the Soldier Innovation Workshop, held May 18-20 at the Detroit Arsenal in Warren, MI. Soldiers collaborated with transportation design students from Detroit’s College for Creative Studies to develop ideas and designs that will inform the concept and requirements for future mobile protected firepower capabilities. Requirements don’t just specify how a system should be built and used; they can also be a blueprint for how government and other stakeholders will work together. (Photo by Jerome J. Aliotta, TARDEC)
But we still have to make sure we discipline ourselves in terms of how we write our requirements, discipline ourselves in terms of how we build our requirements. One key feature, as far as I’m concerned, is that as we build our requirements, we need to understand how much is enough to get us the capability we want. And [there may be] some areas where we say, “Hey, we’d like to stretch ourselves in terms of the capabilities we want to get. They [industry] are making some things that allow us to operate more effectively or that give us some additional key features in terms of lethality or mobility or some other type of ‘-ility.’ ” And then we have to be able to understand that those additional or enhancing things become tradable; otherwise our requirements will exceed our ability to pay for them.
So it’s collaboration, it’s discipline in the requirements, and then it’s making sure that we understand what’s most important, the must-have things to get a capability. And then we can say, “Hey, you know, if we get this it’s great, it will certainly give us added capability or enhance the capability.” But it’s also taking into account the fact of what can be designed, what can be developed, what can be done over time and what it’s going to cost you: That allows us to begin to think about scaling back to get to a more affordable solution.
So that’s in general terms how we go about getting that work done through collaboration. There are a couple of things that we have done in recent months, in this year, FY15, to just try to get the community as a whole to recognize. And one of the things we’re undergoing right now is a series of ROC drills—rehearsal of concept drills—going from capability development to materiel acquisition to delivery of systems.
And this has become a joint effort [involving] not only ARCIC but also the ASA(ALT) community with heavy participation from a lot of stakeholders, including the HQDA G-8 and G-3 folks. The ROC drill is intended to just walk us through the process from the requirements document to an approval, to the resourcing, to all the work that has to go on to define the real technical specification of what that requirement is, to make sure that we don’t overreach on those as well, and then get us to the materiel delivery.
We’ve already done one ROC drill on an existing capability. We wanted to really plow into something that we know that we’re going after, and we’d like to try to see if we can get to the right solution in an innovative way and see if we can get it more rapidly than the normal process typically allows.
But then we’d like to take ourselves through another series of ROC drills to perhaps look at a failed experience to see what were the lessons we were able to pick up and learn—one of our earlier efforts that didn’t yield the results that we wanted, that maybe got bogged down on the requirement side by writing them too rich, where, if we got what we described, it would exceed what we could afford. Maybe we got bogged down on the testing side because we couldn’t develop a system that could pass the test—because we over-prescribed the requirements, making it difficult to test—or maybe we got bogged down on the side of acquisition delivery because what we designed was not achievable because of technology, our inability to integrate the capabilities, etc.
And then lastly, take one program we know we had success with and look at it, and then bring out the best set of lessons learned and see how much of what we learned would require us to adjust our policies, our procedures on both sides, and within our AR 71-9 [“Warfighting Capabilities Determination”] or in making recommendations on the JCIDS [Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System] process or in the DOD 5000 [“Operation of the Defense Acquisition System”].
Army AL&T: In terms of the biggest change you’ve implemented in ARCIC to ensure that requirements are taken into account, has this ROC drill you’re describing been around before, or is this a new process that you’ve put in place?
Wins: We’ve done ROC drills before in ARCIC, but this is the first time since I’ve been here that we’ve done one focused on our requirements. This initiative is fairly new. But one of the things that we have done is, as we’ve gone through requirements, depending on where we’re going—where we are in a milestone decision—we had opportunities to bring together that same team and discuss making changes to the requirements: What changes need to be made? What’s in the art of the possible? What is causing us to have problems where we are coming up with unaffordable solutions?
And when we brought that team together and started having discussions, it was with the idea in mind of modifying the requirement. In doing so, we paid attention to the impact those changes would have on the overall timeline of delivery, be it for the requirements, the technical specifications necessary for the developmental systems or the system in production. We consider these changes as to how they would affect the resourcing and whether we’re pricing ourselves out of business if we’re not willing to be flexible in our requirements. We also considered how well we were applying the right measures in our requirements to get after something that could be tested and evaluated correctly.
A NEW BATTLEFIELD Soldiers from the 40th Special Troops Battalion prepare the Joint Network Node in preparation for a warfighter exercise. ARCIC has the job of figuring out how the Army can get from concept to capability to acquire what it needs to defeat future adversaries. (U.S. Army photo by MAJ Daniel Markert)
Army AL&T: In an article that Breaking Defense did about the Army changing how it does requirements, LTG H.R. McMaster, ARCIC director, said that the Army just did an initial capabilities document for mobile protective firepower. Some of the things you’re describing are milestones. Are you talking theoretically about a new system, or are you talking about looking at current systems and then picking and choosing and trying to apply those in the requirements for new capabilities—in other words, a better path to success?
Wins: It’s not just new requirements. It can in some cases be a requirement we’re making a modification to. The idea of the first ROC drill, as it turns out, focused on a new requirement. So we did one on a new combat platform we’re going after, which we believe is probably going to require development of an initial capabilities document. And so that was one we wanted to look at first. But we also want to go back and look at an example of where we were not successful or [had] a bad experience, and [also] one where we were very successful in delivering a capability.
I think we’re going to pick and choose ones we actually were successful at because we went from the requirement document all the way to the acquisition delivery. But it may turn out the requirements document for that successful developmental system didn’t start with an initial capabilities document. It’s kind of a little technical nuance, but the bottom line is, we’ll look at all of it in order to determine what our best practices were, but also where we might make changes to our internal or external processes.
Army AL&T: When ARCIC articulates a requirement, what’s the mechanism by which you ensure that the acquisition community is interpreting and executing it correctly? You put it out there, but what are the checks and balances as far as ARCIC is concerned?
Wins: For the requirements that get developed, first of all, it’s where they start. They start down in the centers of excellence within the CDID, the Capability Development Integration Directorate. And they typically have TCMs, TRADOC capability managers. Those TCMs should be very much in tune with, or very much committed to, collaborating and working with program managers [PMs] and product managers to properly understand and shape the requirements.
The idea is that as they’re writing the requirements and forming parameters and the attributes from the very beginning, they are having a constant dialogue about what’s in the art of the possible and what would amount to overreaching. They ought to be having a dialogue on what you can measure effectively or how it translates from a KPP, or key performance parameter, or KSA, a key system attribute, into the technical specifications that a PM will have to write, so that when he puts out the performance work statement to industry, they can say, “Oh, yeah, we understand exactly what it is that you’re looking for.”
So it starts at that basic level. The requirement gets written, but it still must be validated, and that is where ARICIC and my directorate become the first gate. And for that validation, my organization is that first line. But we don’t do that work in isolation either. We make sure that as a part of the collaboration we lead, we’re talking to HQDA from a resourcing perspective, we’re talking to HQDA in terms of overall Army priorities for modernization. And we’re talking to the ASA(ALT) people at the secretariat level to make sure that there is a common understanding of what we’re trying to get, when we’re trying to get it, and what the most essential and most important features are that we need in a system.
Army AL&T: As you describe it, it sounds like the capability portfolio review.
Wins: The capability portfolio reviews are a little different. What I’m really talking about is how we do things like participate in ASARC, the Army Systems Acquisition Review Council, configuration steering boards (CSBs) and requirements-to-resources forum (R2R) with the G-8, for example, where we discuss the status of requirements and how we ensure that the most important requirement documents can make it into the headquarters in time for a POM [program objective memorandum] deliberation. Because everything must run on that track, where at some point you’ve got to be able to match money to the requirement you need to deliver. So, for getting a validated requirement to resources, there is a General Officer Steering Committee to move Army requirements along.
Another vehicle that we use is what we call a JCIDS reconciliation, which is done in collaboration with the G3/5/7. It’s a similar approach to R2R, but it’s intended to make sure the Army requirements documents are also getting pushed through to the joint level when it’s needed.
SUM OF MANY REQUIREMENTS A training specialist, second from right, deployed from U.S. Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command, observes Soldiers from 3rd Battalion, 187th Infantry Regiment as they complete operator training on the Common Remotely Operated Weapon Station (CROWS) at Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, in January. CROWS can be mounted on more than 20 platforms and accommodate four different weapons, which means this system of systems is the result of a complex mélange of requirements for hardware, software, vehicles and more. (Photo by Summer Barkley, 401st Army Field Support Brigade)
Army AL&T: While a lot of acquisition focuses on materiel—the tank or the helicopter, for example—there’s also a lot of service and training embedded in the requirements to get the Soldiers up to speed or to create the test ranges and all the associated things. Do you take the same approach, or a different approach, to make sure that all those requirements are also attended to? Is there a new way of thinking about how we incorporate all those aspects into the process? It’s not just the weapon system in the end; it’s all these ancillary things that make it work. From a requirements perspective, do you take the same approach that you do with a weapon?
Wins: From a standpoint of determining how you build capability, the requirement for materiel, acquisition should be the last thing you look for, not the first. We have plenty of capability within the Army that we are able to provide to joint force commanders. But we build new capability when our existing set becomes obsolete, or when we see an opportunity to leverage advances in technology to expand our overmatch, or if that capability is insufficient to meet a need in a certain operational environment or versus a certain threat that has gained an advantage over us, thus limiting our ability to gain and maintain a decisive advantage.
That is what leads us to look across doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, facilities—DOTMLPF. But it is first looked at with an eye toward a small m. We first look within our existing capabilities to find out if there is a nonmaterial solution or one that can be solved with a modest improvement to our existing equipment. It’s sometimes possible there’s an organizational solution to solving a capability gap and it may not require the Army to go after a new material solution.
But having gone through that evaluation, if we determine that a material solution is required, then we begin the process of identifying the requirement and what other areas across DOTMLPF-P may need to be adjusted. And that’s when we have to work with the community across the board.
Often a new material solution requires us to look at different ways to train once that piece of equipment is fielded. If it’s a weapon system, we might need to modify our ranges, we may need to design additional ways to train and qualify crews on system-training aids and devices, or we may need to increase the size of our motor pools or bays to store, repair or perform services on that equipment.
So within TRADOC, we have to work with folks out in [the U.S. Army Combined Arms Center], we work with the centers of excellence, because they have the experts who can do doctrine writing. We have to work with the installation folks to understand how changes in requirements will need to consider those changes in our facilities. Organizationally, we work within my organization and we work with HQDA when changes to our requirements drive a need for changes in structure and our organizations, and so on and so forth.
NEW, MONEY-SAVING PROCESS Joseph Ward injects asphalt into a recovered projectile to cover the surface of the inert cement fill before loading the Insensitive Munition Explosive-101, which replaces TNT and Composition B and provides a more stable fill. Sometimes requirements focus on how to use cast-off parts in new ways. (Photo by Kevin Jackson, U.S. Army Materiel Command)
Army AL&T: Lastly, tell us what you think the Army Acquisition Workforce should know about requirements, their stake in how to do that right.
Wins: I have a number of service uniformed personnel who work in my organization who are part of the Army Acquisition Corps. And it doesn’t hurt to ensure that we have some of [the acquisition community’s] best and brightest come and spend a little time on the operational side, to make sure that we are learning from them and they are learning from us—what it means to have a requirement written in a certain way, what it means when we start talking about, “Hey, we want to go with a software solution,” or, “We think we need to go with an off-the-shelf solution.” We can work together to understand the actual impact our efforts have on you all [the acquisition community] once the requirement is approved, once the resources have been found and once you all have assigned it to a PM or product manager. I think that is pretty valuable.
I think that we need to continue to ensure that the education afforded to our acquisition officers and civilian corps, as well as our capability developers, remains current and informs both sides. We need to make sure there are sufficient blocks of instruction that cover both so that people, at least in a classroom settings, are being well educated so that when they get in the field, they can help us build what’s necessary for our force across the range of operations we are required to perform.
Army AL&T: Well, we’ll pass on your idea about a talent exchange to LTG Michael E. Williamson [Army director, acquisition career management]. But you’re right. If you don’t know what the other guy is doing, it’s hard to understand why they say what they do.
Wins: And I’m really talking about something that LTG Williamson and his folks have already been very good partners in. We recently had a very senior colonel with a great deal of acquisition experience working down in TRADOC, very much embedded in the work we’re doing as part of the Force 2025 effort. We had the opportunity to sit and discuss with him how this effort gets shaped appropriately, what we need to understand about when we can expect the delivery of capability, how you approach it best: Do you go after the whole thing, or do you kind of spiral it in or progressively build on the capability in order to not create significant cost problems for yourself? He was very valuable, and so the hope is that we’ll continue to do that. There’s a lot of good collaboration that’s going on at all levels.
REQUIREMENTS OVERREACH Well-considered and -developed requirements can lead to top-notch systems and programs. Requirements creep—taking a simple system and making it overly complex—can ultimately lead to systems that Soldiers simply cannot use. (Image by Rhett Stansbury, U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center)
Army AL&T: Sir, we greatly appreciate your time. Is there anything else you want to add?
Wins: In this day and age, when we know that the level of resourcing we received over the last 12 years—particularly the resourcing we received for combat operations—is being reduced so significantly, we’ve got to set ourselves up to ensure that continued modernization occurs for the force, and we’ve got to do it smartly and we’ve got to be efficient with it. We’ve got to be disciplined with it, and we’ve got to make sure that we’ve got the right type of leadership oversight to make sure that, from start to finish we deliver on what it is that we’re saying are the most essential capabilities for the Army. You’re not going to be able to get everything, and at the end of the day, we’re really still interested in providing the best capability for the warfighter.
FROM THE ARMY ACQUISITION EXECUTIVE
THE HONORABLE HEIDI SHYU
Investing in S&T to confront the future threat
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.
In October 2014, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command rolled out the latest Army Operating Concept (AOC), titled “Win in a Complex World.” This AOC details how the Army of the future will strengthen capabilities across multiple domains as part of a joint partnership to ensure dominance against “determined, elusive, and increasingly capable enemies.”
Simultaneously, it challenges our forces to “conduct expeditionary maneuver through rapid deployment and transition to operations.” The increasing proliferation of technologies to diverse and capable enemies means the Army must be prepared for a wider and more varied threat picture than ever before. This issue of Army AL&T explores ways the Army employs innovative solutions to ensure our continued dominance, including science and technology (S&T) investments valued at approximately $2.5 billion per year. This includes research performed in Army laboratories, individual research projects at universities, the work of university-affiliated research centers and innovations from small and large companies.
The Army funds critical S&T investments not available in commercial products to enable us to develop breakthrough products that will shape the Army of the future.
EQUIPPED FOR DOMINANCE As night begins to fall on the desert, Pfc. Daniel Porter, an all-source analyst for the 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT), 1st Cavalry Division, secures his night vision optics to his Advanced Combat Helmet during a rotation at the National Training Center, Fort Irwin, California, in February. Both the optics and the helmet are products of extensive research in Army labs. (U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. John Healy, 2nd ABCT Public Affairs)
I will highlight two examples in Army aviation: the Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP) and the Degraded Visual Environment Mitigation (DVE-M).
STRONGER ENGINE, SAFER FLIGHT
ITEP, featured in the October – December 2012 issue of Army AL&T, will produce a new class of turboshaft engine that will replace the current T700 class engine for the UH-60 Black Hawk and AH-64E Apache, which together make up 70 percent of the total Army helicopter fleet. The current T700 engine originated in the 1970s and no longer retains significant potential for power growth to meet new requirements and increased aircraft weight. The Improved Turbine Engine will fit within the current engine nacelle of the UH-60 and AH-64 at similar weight, offering a 50 percent improvement in shaft horsepower and functionality in high-temperature environments around the globe.
Degraded visual environments are responsible for a large majority of Army aviation accidents over the past 10 years. Operating in DVEs was described in an article in the July – September 2012 issue of Army AL&T as a top priority in S&T. The inability to operate safely in DVEs has had a significant impact on tactics, techniques and procedures employed to support the ground force. The Army’s DVE-M program addresses the loss of vertical lift aircraft and the occupant injuries resulting from a lack of situational awareness under various DVEs. Achieving the capability to conduct missions in such conditions will grant a significant tactical advantage by enhancing the safety and effectiveness of Army operations. Just as breakthroughs in infrared technologies allowed the U.S. military to “own the night,” DVE-M will enable us to “own the weather.”
The multidisciplinary DVE-M S&T research explores the trade space between flight controls, sensors and cueing, and will enable Army aviators to safely fly in white-out, brown-out, rain, fog, clouds, smog or darkness. The long-term goal is to provide Army aviation the ability to conduct operations 24/7, 365 days a year regardless of weather and environmental conditions.
BEYOND OWNING THE NIGHT The Army is preparing to introduce the Enhanced Night Vision Goggle III (ENVG III), with fielding to begin in 2017. Worn on a helmet like earlier models, the ENVG III can be wirelessly linked to the Family of Weapon Sights Individual, which is mounted on small-arms weapons. The ENVG III is the latest technological breakthrough enhancing the U.S. military’s established ability to own the night. (Image courtesy of Program Executive Office for Soldier)
RESEARCH LEADS INNOVATION
Another example of the Army’s commitment to investing in innovative technologies is our laboratories. In 16 Army laboratories across the country, nearly 12,000 scientists and engineers perform research that is vital to our Soldiers. In our labs, these scientists and engineers work on projects covering a wide variety of technological innovations that address the challenges facing the Army around the world.
WEATHER OR NOT New York Army National Guard Lt. Col. Kevin Ferreira, operations officer for the 42nd Combat Aviation Brigade, conducts a simulated flight during training in June at Fort Drum, New York. The goal of Army S&T research into DVE-M is to provide Army aviation the capability to conduct operations 24/7, 365 days a year regardless of weather and environmental conditions. (U.S. Army National Guard photo by Sgt. J.P. Lawrence)
These projects range from basic research in materials to applied research focused on solving specific military problems to advanced technology development demonstrating technical feasibility at the system or subsystem level. Examples of these technology projects include advancements in lighter and stronger armor, next-generation night vision goggles, directed-energy weapons, nontraditional ground-vehicle survivability demonstrators optimized for occupant-centric protection, reducing operational energy consumption and Soldier load, optimizing training with live-virtual-constructive simulation, and medical research in support of care for traumatic brain injuries and rehabilitation for wounded warriors.
CONCLUSION
In order to win in an increasingly complex and uncertain world, we must have the capabilities to address the full spectrum of potential threats, from countering terrorism to helping partner nations counter nation-state threats. This entails rapidly developing and fielding a broad portfolio of capabilities that will enhance our mobility, survivability, situational awareness and lethality in different environments.
Winning in an uncertain world is no small task. However, the Army has repeatedly risen to great challenges in its 240 years. With our focus on nurturing innovative S&T to enable the next generation of dominant capabilities and our strong partnerships with the commercial and defense industrial base, the Army is prepared to rise to tough challenges. Armed with this commitment to innovation and partnership, we will keep our forces Army Strong.
FROM THE LAB, FOR THE SOLDIER The Concept for Advanced Military Explosion-Mitigating Land Demonstrator (CAMEL) was on display at the Pentagon during DOD Lab Day May 14. CAMEL shows how research by the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM) on improving blast protection in vehicle platforms considers the occupant first and offers lessons learned for the development of future military vehicle platforms. CAMEL is also but one example of how Army laboratories are investing in innovative technologies, and how Army scientific and engineering efforts enable Soldiers on the battlefield to have technological overmatch. (U.S. Army photo by Conrad Johnson, RDECOM Public Affairs)
This article was originally published in the October – December 2015 issue of Army AL&T magazine.
From the Principle Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army
for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology
Mr. Gabriel Camarillo
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view. Throughout a five-year period of remarkable change and instability, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT)) Heidi Shyu has left a remarkable legacy as a leader, professional—and, to many, a mentor. Her tenure in the ASA(ALT) organization has left not only lasting impacts on the warfighter and the acquisition process, but also an indelible mark on the Army acquisition community, and all those she worked with and alongside during her time with the Army. We will miss her significant contributions to the Army.
Ms. Shyu first joined ASA(ALT) in November 2010 as the principal deputy. She was nominated to serve as the ASA(ALT) in February 2012 and confirmed that September. During her tenure, I have had the distinct privilege and pleasure to serve as both her special assistant and principal deputy—a proximity that enabled me to learn a great deal. Watching her gracefully assume and execute the heavy responsibilities of leading a workforce of nearly 5,000 people and managing more than 600 Army programs, I quickly came to appreciate her business acumen, strong technical expertise, unparalleled leadership and, above all else, her unwavering commitment to the warfighter.
A MEMORABLE BEGINNING Shyu is sworn in as the ASA(ALT) by Undersecretary of the Army Joseph W. Westphal on Oct. 4, 2012, at the Pentagon. She had served as acting ASA(ALT) since June 4, 2011. Shyu is retiring at the end of January. (Photo by SSG Bernardo Fuller)
Her time in the Office of the ASA(ALT) spanned one of the most austere fiscal climates in the history of the service, with steeply declining budgets across DOD, and saw a significant drawdown of personnel and equipment from two theaters. Despite these challenges, I was always impressed by her commitment to a future that needed preparation: capabilities that required investment, threats that required a planned response and future leaders in the organization that called for mentoring. Throughout it all, she infused our work—the Army’s mission—with an uncommon humanity and disarming sense of humor. Working in Army acquisition became more than a noble calling; it became an exciting and enjoyable endeavor on behalf of our Soldiers.
LEADER OF LEADERS Shyu, flanked by the author and LTG Michael E. Williamson, principal military deputy to the ASA(ALT), joins senior leaders from across the Army acquisition community—primarily program executive officers (PEOs) and deputy assistant secretaries of the Army (DASAs)—at the PEO-DASA Summit in December 2015 in Orlando, FL. (Photo by 1LT Brittany Kluck, 143rd Sustainment Command (Expeditionary) Public Affairs)
MANAGING WELL ON MULTIPLE LEVELS
Secretary Shyu’s accomplishments are too numerous to describe here, but three stand out as she leaves ASA(ALT). First, she established a successful emphasis on core competencies for the enterprise. Sound program planning, risk management and detailed execution reviews were her hallmarks. She worked tirelessly on evenings and weekends, often summoning us to technical “deep dives” that lasted hours to help define a program strategy. The result was a set of programs that were managed well with clear direction and strategy. This no-nonsense approach to acquisition offered a lasting counterpoint to critics who pointed to a history of program cancellations and false starts.
A PERSONAL APPROACH Typical of her ASA(ALT) leadership style combining a disarming sense of humor with a solemn dedication to the warfighter, Shyu shares a lighthearted moment with the Soldiers of 4th Battalion, 27th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division during Network Integration Evaluation 15.2 in May 2015. (Photo by SGT Jessica Littlejohn, 24th Press Camp Headquarters)
Second, Secretary Shyu succeeded in guiding the Army’s equipping efforts beyond the immediate needs of current operations to focus on capabilities required in the future. Her push for a comprehensive approach fundamentally changed the processes used to plan investment in research, development and acquisition to allow for extended planning over a 30-year horizon.
This had the effect of linking processes for defining investment in science and technology with existing acquisition programs and Army sustainment efforts in new ways. These effects will be appreciated for years to come. Finally, in yet another era of acquisition reform, Secretary Shyu reminded us all of an often unheard voice in the debate—that of the program manager.
Contrasting what she saw in acquisition with her own experience in the private sector, she highlighted the differences experienced by government program managers who often lack the ability to flexibly use resources—both fiscal and personnel—to overcome technical challenges and achieve innovative results. She often relied on humorous analogies about the burdens on the program manager who faces accountability for results but shares responsibility across a diffuse set of stakeholders. Army acquisition will miss her ability to communicate these challenges so effectively using inimitable charm and engaging personality.
IN THE THICK OF IT CW2 Pedro Alvarado, right, retrosort yard accountability officer attached to the 82nd Sustainment Brigade (SB) – U.S. Central Command Materiel Recovery Element (CMRE), briefs Shyu and Gen. Dennis L. Via, left, commanding general of U.S. Army Materiel Command, on CMRE materiel reduction efforts at Kandahar Airfield, Afghanistan, in March 2014. Shyu established a holistic, forward-looking approach to acquisition planning, linking processes for investment in science and technology with existing programs and Army sustainment efforts in new ways. (U.S. Army photo by SFC Jon Cupp, 82nd SB-CMRE Public Affairs)
CONCLUSION
Without question, Secretary Shyu has left an indelible mark on the heart of the Army and DOD acquisition communities. While I know we will all miss her greatly, I remain confident that her commendable dedication to our Army will continue to inspire us long after her departure. I am profoundly grateful to have had the opportunity to learn from her and serve with her. She has earned a well-deserved break from those five-hour technical deep dives, and I wish her all the best in her next challenge.
GETTING TECHNICAL SSG Micah Hitchcock, U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) air operations noncommissioned officer in charge, instructs Shyu on how to fire the Precision Sniper Rifle MK 21 MOD 0 during the Special Operations Forces Acquisition Summit at MacDill AFB, FL, in October 2014. Formerly vice president of technology strategy for Raytheon Company’s Space and Airborne Systems, Shyu, who holds advanced degrees in mathematics and electrical engineering, brought strong technical expertise to the job of ASA(ALT). (Photo by TSgt Angelita Lawrence, USSOCOM)
This article was originally published in the January – March 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.
AAE committed to Better Buying Power, funding R&D and supporting the workforce
From the Army Acquisition Executive
The Honorable Katrina McFarland
Since its inception, the United States Army has answered the call to protect our nation and safeguard our way of life. We are the greatest land force the world has ever known. We demonstrate our strength when we adapt to rise against evolving threats, and we are always ready for our next mission—whenever and wherever it may be. The Army Acquisition Corps, in turn, has a duty we hold sacred: to design, deliver and sustain the critical enabling capabilities our Soldiers need for mission success so that our Army can always achieve and maintain dominance. I am honored to join this impressive team as your acting assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology (ASA(ALT)).
None of us gets to choose when the next threat confronts our nation. Constant readiness—with a continued focus on modernization in a time of ongoing fiscal uncertainty—is how we ensure that our Soldiers will maintain the decisive edge against evolving threats.
After my arrival in this office, I outlined my three priorities for ASA(ALT) to guide our endeavors in this mission: people, products and processes.
FUTURE FLIGHT? Joint Common Architecture will support the Army’s future Vertical Lift Fleet. (Photo Credit: U.S. Army)
PEOPLE
One of the key tenets of the Better Buying Power program is professionalizing the acquisition workforce—our most critical asset. While serving as president of the Defense Acquisition University (DAU), I oversaw the development and expansion of acquisition curriculum and supported learning opportunities for over 150,000 members of the Defense Acquisition Workforce. The ASA(ALT) team has been equally dedicated to the professional development of the Army Acquisition Workforce and to strengthening the capacity of the acquisition, procurement, requirements and logistics enterprises to deliver affordable equipment to our Soldiers.
We must continue to prioritize this endeavor to ensure that our Soldiers maintain their advantage. The Army Acquisition Workforce is entrusted with being effective stewards of Army resources and with providing for the Army’s current and future needs. With such a critical responsibility, it is imperative that we do all we can to develop the workforce by providing training opportunities and resources for professional growth. We will foster a culture of teamwork, mutual respect, adaptability and the highest levels of professionalism.
SOLDIER SCIENCE Sgt. Zachary Howard, Co. B., 4th Battalion, 17th Infantry Regiment, attached to 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division, operates a PD-150 Soldier borne sensor during Network Integration Evaluation 16.1, Oct. 1, 2015, on Fort Bliss, Texas. The demonstration was run by 4/17 to distinguished visitors on the capabilities of manned unmanned teaming systems. (Photo by Spc. Aura E. Sklenicka, 2/1 ABCT PAO)
PRODUCTS
The products that the people of the Army Acquisition Workforce develop are the tools our Soldiers need to safeguard their decisive advantage on the battlefield. We must continue our efforts to design and deliver breakthrough technologies. To maintain our technical superiority, we have been dedicated to science and technology (S&T) investments that will drive our Army into the future. We have made steady progress on this front, but we cannot rest on our laurels. This commitment to innovation must continue to ensure that we are ready for our next engagement, whenever and wherever that may be.
For example, we will continue our efforts to upgrade the Army’s aviation portfolio via the Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstrator and Future Vertical Lift programs. We will work to mitigate the risk of aviation accidents by exploring solutions for degraded visual environments, allowing our Army aviators to operate in any environment, day or night, regardless of weather conditions. We must do the same for our ground forces. When we invest in S&T innovations, we invest in our vision for the U.S. Army—a force capable of meeting challenging fiscal climates head-on and maintaining our technological superiority over our adversaries.
OPENING DOORS TO KNOWLEDGE Dr. Matthew Kurman (left), a member of the Engines Research Team, explains the work they do to Defense Acquisition University fellows touring the Vehicle Research Laboratory on Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, Feb. 4, 2016. (Photo Credit: Conrad Johnson, RDECOM)
PROCESSES
As mentioned previously, I am dedicated to upholding the guidelines of the Better Buying Power program as a means of strengthening and reforming the acquisition process. The Army is facing significant challenges with rapidly increasing threats and decreasing modernization budgets. For years, its research and development (R&D) and acquisition accounts have declined at a significantly faster rate than the Army’s top-line budget.
To meet these challenges, the Army acquisition community must continue to work toward achieving affordable programs; controlling life-cycle costs; incentivizing productivity in both industry and government; eliminating unproductive processes and bureaucracy; and improving tradecraft in acquisition. Our Soldiers need superior technologies and innovations more than ever—yet our ability to procure and field these solutions will be in jeopardy if we do not continue to streamline the acquisition process and make wiser choices for our return on investments.
As we pursue next-generation technologies to mature our aging fleets and portfolios, we must remember that it is not enough to modernize our technology—we must also continue to modernize our methods of acquiring it if we are to maintain our technological edge. Only then can we successfully deliver the capabilities our Soldiers need to accomplish their mission.
EQUIPPING THE ROTATIONAL FORCE Workers load an M109A6 Paladin onto a trailer at the Port of Klaipeda on Dec. 4, 2015, in Klaipeda, Lithuania. The 624th Movement Control Team, 39th Transportation Battalion (Movement Control), 16th Sustainment Brigade, ensured the Paladin and other pieces of European Activity Set equipment were loaded into vessels bound for Coleman Barracks in Mannheim, Germany, where they will be serviced and stored for use by the next rotational force. (Photo Credit: Photo by Staff Sgt. Michael Behlin)
CONCLUSION
In this issue of AL&T magazine, you will discover how each of these three elements plays a crucial role in sustainment. To quote from the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command’s “The United States Army Functional Concept for Sustainment, 2016-2028,” “The provision of sustainment is an integrated process, involving people, systems, materiel, health services, and other support, which is inextricably linked to operations.” To be successful in sustaining operations until mission accomplishment, we need the right people, products and processes.
Sustainment is intimately tied to our call to service. Like the Army acquisition enterprise’s mission to constantly provide the best for our Soldiers, sustainment involves a persistent need to see each mission through. It is not enough to deliver materiel and solutions to our warfighters on the battlefield; we must also sustain the equipment we develop until the work is done and each Soldier comes home. This timely issue of AL&T magazine will illuminate the part all of us play in achieving this vision.
Our Army is witnessing a time of great change, but we remain steadfast in our pursuit of our ongoing goals. All of us in ASA(ALT) are charged with doing our part to strengthen Army acquisition. As your leader, I commit and challenge you to commit yourselves to achieving lasting acquisition reform.
Together, we will work toward attaining affordable and realistic requirements in Army programs. We will continue to leverage the groundbreaking technologies coming from small businesses. We will continue to recognize the pivotal role of the Army’s S&T innovations in shaping the force of the future. We owe it to our Soldiers to constantly put our best foot forward, so that we may deliver the lifesaving solutions and critically enabling capabilities they need for mission success. The ASA(ALT) team has a long legacy of rising to challenges, and I am confident that our commitment to our Soldiers will continue to guide us to excellence.
THE EYES HAVE IT Spc. Daniel Oladejo (right) and Spc. Peter Johnson, biomedical science technicians with the U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, make adjustments to the shock tube Feb. 24 at Fort Sam Houston, Texas. The shock tube is a piece of equipment designed to simulate exposure to explosions similar to what Soldiers may encounter while in combat. The data collected from the device is crucial to the ocular research directorate, which focuses on research and advances in medicine aimed at helping Soldiers suffering from ocular related conditions. (U.S. Army Photo by Sgt. Aaron Ellerman, 204th Public Affairs Detachment/Released
This article was originally published in the April – June 2016 issue of Army AL&T magazine.
CAMP ARIFJAN, Kuwait — The acting Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology visited the 401st Army Field Support Brigade here, May 3, to get a firsthand look at how the brigade provides logistic support throughout the U.S. Army Central Command footprint.
Katrina McFarland, acting assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology sits in a MaxxPro mine-resistant ambush protected (MRAP) vehicle during her visit to the 401st Army Field Support Brigade at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, May 3. (Photo by Justin Graff, 401st AFSB Public Affairs)
Katrina McFarland, acting assistant secretary of the Army (AL&T), toured equipment warehouses and spoke with 401st Army Field Support Brigade Commander, Col. Chris Day about logistic challenges and innovations in supporting such a large area of operation.
“There’s so much going on in theater. The environment is very complex,” McFarland said. “They have to show so much adaptability to keep readiness high.”
The tour began with a briefing at the 401st AFSB headquarters, where McFarland and a small group of military leaders and logisticians discussed communication and continuity challenges caused by high turnover rates of personnel.
“Everybody is communicating the same message,” McFarland said. “Do we have the right equipment? Do we have the number of people we need to support theater operations? I want people back home, and here in the field, to see all the hard work we do here.”
McFarland received short briefings from maintenance experts and had an opportunity to get a close look at some military equipment and vehicles.
401st Army Field Support Brigade Commander, Col. Chris Day (right), discusses logistics support and maintenance with Katrina McFarland, acting assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology during a tour of brigade facilities at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, May 3. (Photo by Justin Graff, 401st AFSB Public Affairs)
The opportunity for McFarland to see the current equipment is good for logistics and acquisition relationships, said Day.
“Having Mrs. McFarland here is an important visit,” Day said. “The acquisition community and the AMC community are strategically linked to provide that readiness capability to the warfighter.”
The 401st AFSB provides logistic support throughout the CENTCOM Theater, in tandem with three Army Field Support Battalions and 1st Theater Sustainment Command.
“As logisticians, we have access to all the tools and logistics mechanisms of Army Materiel Command and Army Sustainment Command, but locally our requirements come from TSC,” Day said. “This makes us unique as AMC’s face to the field, and gives us a unique ability to provide a strategic level capability to the CENTCOM and ARCENT theaters.”
McFarland and Day exchanged coins at the end of the visit. McFarland also presented coins to maintenance experts during her tour of 401st AFSB facilities.
MRAP Site Lead Bryan Valentino discusses maintenance of MaxxPro mine-resistant ambush protected (MRAP) vehicles with Katrina McFarland, acting assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology during a tour of brigade facilities at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, May 3. (Photo by Justin Graff, 401st AFSB Public Affairs)
Stakeholders broke out of traditional roles while testing and evaluating cybersecurity at NIE 16.2, learning that when red and blue teams talk earlier and more often, cyber systems get stronger.
by Lt. Col. Jeff Strauss and Mr. Robert Wedgeworth
The ever-increasing complexity and interconnectivity of Army tactical networks and mission command systems, along with the requirement for mission assurance in the contested domain of cyberspace, present a unique challenge to operational testing and evaluation (T&E). The challenges in cyber (T&E) stem from several factors, first among them the sheer number of devices and the amount of data they exchange. These, when coupled with the growing size, evolution and complexity of software and the ever-present human factor risks, can make it seem nearly impossible to assess the true cybersecurity posture of our networks.
These challenges call for new and innovative ways to partner for success in cyber T&E, in fact a fundamental change in our traditional approaches. One such successful partnership was evident recently in the teaming of multiple organizations at Network Integration Evaluation (NIE) 16.2. During this event in May 2016, the stakeholders charged with developing, testing, fielding and ultimately operating and defending tactical networks and mission command systems took a fresh look at cybersecurity T&E paradigms, including the exchange of information.
These stakeholders included program managers (PMs) from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT)), along with testers from the U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC), the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL), the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) G-2, and the Threat Systems Management Office (TSMO). Army cyber defenders at the brigade, division and regional cyber center levels completed the team.
Cybersecurity T&E requirements are grounded in DOD Instruction 5000.2, “Operation of the Defense Acquisition System,” and other supporting regulations and directives. The primary purpose of cybersecurity T&E is to determine the operational impact of real-world cyber effects on the unit’s mission. The overall evaluation of a system’s cyber posture is a result of testing across the spectrum of developmental and operational environments, which typically follow the test-fix-test model. The operational test (OT) environment is the most complex and involves linking the system under test to the Soldier operators and defenders in an operational environment, including a representative cyber threat force.
ONE DEVICE OF MANY A Soldier assigned to 1st Battalion, 1st Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team sets an unmanned observer drone during NIE 16.2 in May 2016 at Fort Bliss, Texas. The huge number of devices and systems in the network—and the volume of their interactions with one another and their human users—make it difficult for Army cyber defenders to get a true picture of the Army’s cybersecurity posture. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Henrique Luiz de Holleben, 55th Combat Camera)
CYBER TESTING STEP BY STEP
The first step to cyber testing during an OT event is a cooperative vulnerability and penetration assessment (CVPA). Cybersecurity professionals evaluate the system to uncover all potential vulnerabilities and threat vectors. The system technical experts, typically program office or field service representatives, and network defenders cooperate fully and work directly with ARL testers to perform a comprehensive assessment. The CVPA typically occurs weeks or months before the actual OT. The results of the CVPA are shared with defenders and owners of the system under test. Then cooperation begins to attempt to correct any cyber deficiencies before the next phase of testing.
The second cybersecurity test event is the adversarial assessment. This “assesses the ability of a unit equipped with a system to support its missions while withstanding validated and representative cyber threat activity.” Additionally, testers are chartered to “evaluate the ability to protect the system, detect threat activity, react to threat activity, and restore mission capability degraded or lost due to threat activity.” In NIE 16.2, cyber operators from the TSMO assumed this adversarial role, attempting to gain access, exploit vulnerabilities and create mission effects on the systems under test.
BLUE VS. RED
In a traditional OT environment, participants maintain a rigid separation of the test audience, known as the Blue Team, and the opposing threat forces, or the Red Team, to preserve the operational realism of the test event. In the cyber domain, this “firewalling” of the red and blue elements historically has led to disappointing and frustrating cyber assessments.
There are several challenges with this traditional model. The primary challenge is a lack of timely detailed feedback on the systems and the efforts to defend them; feedback typically is not available until well after all testing is completed. Without any dialogue among stakeholders, these OT events fail to achieve their full potential in uncovering system vulnerabilities and developing improvement strategies for detection and mitigation. While traditional tests typically achieve the goal of demonstrating the operational risk of cyber vulnerabilities, they fall short of the goal to actually improve prevention, detection and mitigation procedures.
Historically, OT cyber testing has revealed a consistent list of problems: default passwords, misconfigured hardware, poor user behavior and unpatched vulnerabilities. While this is important, much more can and should be learned from these rare opportunities to exercise cyber defense in a realistic environment. When cybersecurity OT finds only seemingly simple issues that surface routinely, it leads to frustration for decision-makers at every level.
The result of “firewalling” key players during cyber OT often results in the system’s PMs discovering the “bad news” far too late in the system life cycle, when making meaningful changes is more costly and time-consuming. The lack of real-time feedback was also a problem for principal decision-makers throughout the acquisition and T&E communities who desired more comprehensive exploration of cyberattack vectors and methods.
ENABLING BETTER MISSION COMMAND A Soldier inspects a mobile Warfighter Information Network – Tactical (WIN-T) network node during NIE 16.2 in May 2016 at Fort Bliss, Texas. WIN-T provides the tactical communications network backbone to enable mission command, network communications and situational awareness across the brigade. The real-time interactions between blue and red teams at NIE 16.2 offered WIN-T’s developers the opportunity to note and fix weaknesses in this critical backbone sooner. (Photo by Amy Walker, PEO C3T Public Affairs)
A DIFFERENT APPROACH
During NIE16.2, Brig. Gen. Kenneth L. Kamper, then commanding general of ATEC’s U.S. Army Operational Test Command, envisioned a different approach to cyber OT centered on teaming. “We have some very specific goals when it comes to cyber operation testing and protocols that need to be followed for good reasons, but we also ought to be using every opportunity to learn and get better every day,” said Kamper after the event.
Striking that balance was the goal of several partner agencies charged with the conduct of cyber OT at NIE 16.2. The central concept involved much more frequent and results-minded interaction between the red and blue elements. The assumption was that if the network defenders (Blue Team) were provided more information about how the cyber threat (Red Team) was behaving, then they would be in a much better position to prevent, detect, react to and ultimately defeat the cyber threat and restore systems. The result would be a more comprehensive assessment of the cybersecurity posture of systems under test during the condensed testing window of the 14-day evaluation.
The Blue Team met with the Red Team before the event and at the midpoint to discuss what each was seeing on the network. These formative discussions, while somewhat guarded to maintain a spirit of fair competition, were productive in ensuring that the teams were not overly focused on one aspect of the network and systems. At the end of the event, a much more robust and open technical exchange was conducted. This exchange, labeled the “Tech-on-Tech,” was analogous to the after-action reviews that are a staple of the combined arms training centers. Here, both red and blue teams discussed what their plans and actions were during each phase of the test event. The discussion allowed an immediate, in-depth analysis of the action-to-counteraction maneuvering on the network and resulted in lessons learned for both the defenders and those responsible for system engineering and design.
TECH-ON-TECH
A special feature of this exchange was the presentation of a codified assessment of defenders’ actions against the threat. This evaluation rubric outlined behaviors and criteria along a continuum of observed indicators from the viewpoint of the adversary. The Red Team essentially told the Blue Team how hard the Blue Team made each phase of the threat presentation based on discrete observations of the network security. The feedback from the event was uniformly positive. One observer from the Blue Team stated that he learned more during this event than from all previous NIEs combined. This positive response has prompted decision-makers to further explore and codify this concept for future NIEs and similar cyber test events.
While senior leaders in the test and PM communities push for more opportunities to partner closely in cyber T&E, they are also paying special attention to ensure the integrity and validity of operational realism. In planning future exchanges during OT, caution is warranted in data exchanges among developers, defenders and testers. It is critical that teams not mask system issues, and thus make system performance appear better in a test than it would actually be in a true operational situation, by exchanging too much information. Invalid testing could allow the fielding of substandard equipment, threaten our national security and ultimately cause loss of service members’ lives.
BLUE TEAM SEARCHES FOR RED A High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle outfitted with a radar system scans for possible enemy aircraft during a training exercise as part of NIE 16.2 near Fort Bliss, Texas, in May 2016. NIE 16.2 took a new approach to testing and evaluating new cyber capabilities: Instead of keeping the teams that play Army users and opposing forces separate until the event was over, NIE 16.2 allowed them to talk and evaluate during the event, giving stakeholders a better understanding of new systems’ strengths and weaknesses, sooner. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Jarred Woods, 16th Mobile Public Affairs Detachment)
The stakeholders at NIE 16.2 did an excellent job of balancing this need to maintain threat integrity for the system under test with the desire to make systems better through collaboration. While these partnering events were not as robust as exchanges held during training events or Army Warfighting Assessments, they re-established the notion of “one team” and helped break down the “us vs. them” atmosphere that can inhibit positive exchanges and improvement in cybersecurity.
Ensuring that systems are ready for Soldier to rely on them on the battlefield remains the focus of operational testing, and these exchanges helped to meet that end. The Tech-on-Tech discussion, observed by PMs and developers, provided great insight into the test and how systems fared against a representative cyber threat. The content was much more technical than at previous events, covering specific software and hardware vulnerabilities and exploitations. During the final exchange, subject matter experts from the blue and red teams participated in focused discussions with system developers on how to thoroughly improve the system under test.
CONCLUSION
The initial feedback on these discussions has been very positive. Col. Greg Coile, project manager for the Warfighter Information Network – Tactical, praised the continued partnering initiative. “The insights we gained in near-real time of potential vulnerabilities in the network and applications enabled us to make rapid improvements to continue to harden the network,” Coile said after the event.
A post-test presentation of NIE 16.2 cyber findings, hosted by the Program Executive Office for Command, Control and Communications –Tactical (PEO C3T) after a more comprehensive analysis of the event results, discussed various source code and software features that could be modified to enhance security. This review looked at network diagrams and screenshots of trouble areas, among other analysis, and reinforced the spirit of partnership as developers, PM system engineers, various software testers, Red and Blue teams, and PM and PEO leadership worked together to better understand the cybersecurity posture and performance of the tested systems.
After the event, Nancy Kreidler, the information assurance program manager for PEO C3T, summed it up this way: “The follow-on technical exchange between the Red Team and our larger team of security engineers from the program offices was invaluable. It allowed our folks to look at vulnerabilities in a new light and get after some of these challenges in our labs.”
The unassailable truth about cybersecurity is that the discipline is evolving at a rate that challenges our current processes all along the spectrum of doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, facilities and policy. If we are to have any chance to surmount this rapidly changing problem, we must be willing to challenge our own culturally entrenched ways of thinking about the problems and refuse to become moored to any idea that limits our overall ability to respond to change and accomplish valid and reliable testing. Partnership among all stakeholders is the key to tackling these difficult problems in a dynamic discipline.
For more information on how programs can succeed through increased partnering between the test and acquisition communities, or to request test team support, go to https://www.atec.army.mil/rfts.html.
FEEDBACK STRAIGHT FROM THE FIELD During NIE 16.2 in May 2016, Soldiers in the Fort Bliss, Texas, desert delivered feedback on the systems under test through the 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division’s Main Tactical Operations Center. Culminating this steady feedback was an open, rigorous, highly detailed Tech-on-Tech review at the end of the NIE in which the red and blue teams discussed their plans and actions to attack and defend a cyber system during each phase of the test event. (Photo by Vanessa Flores, ASA(ALT) System of Systems Integration Directorate)
LT. COL. JEFF STRAUSS in the senior acquisition adviser in the Survivability Evaluation Directorate of ATEC, with over 10 years of acquisition and T&E experience. He holds a master’s degree in cybersecurity policy from the University of Maryland, Baltimore County and a B.S in construction science from Texas A&M University. A member of the Army Acquisition Corps (AAC), he is Level II certified in program management and is a certified project management professional.
MR. ROBERT WEDGEWORTH is a threat cybersecurity operations test lead with TSMO under the Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation. He has over 15 years of experience in the areas of information warfare and cyberspace operations. He has an M.S. in systems engineering (information warfare) from the Naval Postgraduate School and a B.S. in mathematics from Auburn University. He is level III certified in information technology and a member of the AAC.
This article is scheduled to be published in the April – June issue of Army AL&T Magazine.
WASHINGTON (June 26, 2017) – The Principal Military Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA(ALT)), Maj. Gen. Paul A. Ostrowski, announced the fourth annual Maj. Gen. Harold J. “Harry” Greene Awards for Acquisition Writing competition today to encourage critical writing focused on Army acquisition.
“The annual writing competition is designed to showcase the tremendous talent and creativity within the acquisition community and those associated with it,” said Ostrowski. “Each year, we invite participants to candidly share their ideas, expertise, and experiences by writing about them,” he continued. “In doing so, we honor a leader who was passionate about our responsibility to provide Soldiers with the best equipment in the world.”
Designed to drive the dialogue about meeting and overcoming challenges in delivering capabilities to the Warfighter, the competition is open to anyone and seeks maximum participation, especially by members of the defense acquisition workforce. “We are living in interesting times,” Ostrowski said. “We need to think and write clearly about our challenges and opportunities. This competition is the perfect venue to reflect on Army acquisition – its past, present, and future.”
Prospective authors may submit articles, opinion pieces, or essays from 500 words to 1,800 words in one of four categories including lessons learned; innovation; future operations; or acquisition reform. The 2016 winners and honorable mentions were published in a supplement accompanying the January 2017 edition of Army AL&T magazine. They were also honored at the U.S. Army Acquisition Executive’s Awards Ceremony and Banquet held in Springfield, Virginia, in December 2016.
Submissions must be unclassified, original, not previously published or submitted to a writing competition, and completed during Fiscal Year 2017. Four award winners will be selected, one in each category with four additional works selected for honorable mention. All entries must be submitted by email no later than midnight September 26, 2017. Additional information about the competition is found at the ASA(ALT) website, including the call for submissions. The winners will be recognized at an award ceremony in Washington, D.C.
One of the authors earning an honorable mention in the innovation category during the first competition noted the benefits of participating. “It provided a means to have my voice heard other than just through the established chain of command in submitting comments and recommendations for draft regulation reviews, and it also served as an important way to represent [Lower Tier Project Office],” said David Cook, from Program Executive Office Missiles and Space.
The acquisition writing competition is named for Maj. Gen. Greene, the Deputy Commanding General of the Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan, who was killed by an Afghan Soldier on Aug. 5, 2014, while making a visit to Marshal Fahim National Defense University in Kabul, Afghanistan. He was promoted to Maj. Gen. in 2012 while serving as the Deputy for Acquisition and Systems Management in ASA(ALT) prior to deploying in January 2014 to Afghanistan.
From the standpoint of ASA(ALT)’s test and evaluation unit, there’s a better way to support test and evaluation events, one that would directly improve operational readiness.
by Ms. Laura Pegher, Mr. Adam Bussey and Ms. Amber Dufour
In an acquisition environment concerned with all things cost, schedule and performance, logistics and product testing historically have tended to be an afterthought or overlooked altogether. The Army places a high priority on validating performance requirements in various developmental and operational tests, but acquisition test events such as the logistics demonstration (log demo) and verification of the technical manual often take a back seat.
Based on historical data, the U.S. Army Forces Command (FORSCOM), along with other Army commands, Army service component commands and depot replacement units, have experienced significant challenges with sourcing log demos and technical manual verification events. Sourcing is the term used for applying Soldiers as a test resource. This takes the Soldiers in high-demand military occupational specialties (MOSs), specifically maintainer MOSs, away from their primary duties and deployment training while giving the test community a real-user experience.
Technical manual verification timelines can range from two weeks up to a year, depending on the system complexity, and the average technical manual verification requires five Soldiers as test users. The sourcing challenge is primarily because of the long durations of these events, with negative impacts on unit operational readiness as Soldier maintainers are pulled away to support the event. Given the current state of available resources, test and evaluation (T&E) requirements are exceeding the Army’s capabilities across the force. Thus, the Army must develop solutions to set clear priorities and supply T&E events with adequate resources in order of importance.
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.
Soldiers verify procedures to separate an engine from a generator set at Detroit Arsenal in January. It can take five Soldiers and two to 52 weeks to verify that a technical manual is accurate and usable; proposals to allow log demos and technical manual verifications to occur simultaneously aim to reduce the drain T&E can have on readiness. (Photo by John Lillis, TACOM Life Cycle Management Command)
THE ARMY RESOURCING PROCESS
The Army currently uses a committee called the Test Schedule and Review Committee (TSARC) to manage resources for Army tests, multiservice operational T&E, joint T&E and experiments or demonstrations. The TSARC is responsible for maximizing the use of limited resources while minimizing the test events’ impacts on unit operational readiness. The TSARC’s primary functions include:
Coordinating all required test resources.
Synchronizing tests.
Reviewing schedules.
Managing support to experiments, investigations, demonstrations, technical manual verifications, studies and other efforts that generally do not require a T&E master plan.
Validating resource requirements and providing recommendations to the deputy chief of staff, G–3/5/7 for approval or disapproval.
The TSARC process occurs twice in a given fiscal year, with a spring cycle and a fall cycle, and has multiple levels: the initial working group, the mid-cycle working group, the council of colonels and a two-star general officer forum. Each of these groups identifies, coordinates and attempts issue resolution. If needed, the issue is then elevated to the next level. Test resource plans (TRPs), the formal resource document developed by the requesting organization, are submitted to the TSARC for appropriate validation, prioritization and sourcing. All TRPs are cross-checked with all potential force providers to ensure efficient and appropriate use of Army resources.
Participants in the TSARC include the U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC), HQDA G-3/5/7, the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology (ASA(ALT)), HQDA G-8, FORSCOM, the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), the deputy undersecretary of the Army for T&E and the U.S. Army Pacific Command.
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.
Maintainers walk through the steps to remove a generator set from a chemical-biological protective shelter at Detroit Arsenal in January. Army regulations require that technical manual verification be conducted completely by Soldiers. However, CASCOM and HQDA G-3/5/7 have made formal requests to ease that requirement and permit government civilian personnel to replace Soldiers. (Photo by John Lillis, TACOM Life Cycle Management Command)
PLAN B: CIVILIANS
Recently, there has been discussion among ATEC, ASA(ALT), HQDA G-3/5/7 and HQDA G-8 on how best to source the log demo and technical manual verification events. Several questions typically arise:
How long is the event?
How many Soldiers are required?
What type (MOS) of Soldier is required for the event?
What is the impact if the event goes unsourced in this cycle?
What is the drop-dead date for resources?
What is the test window for completing this effort?
These discussions have resulted in a better understanding of overall logistics product development, the importance of proving out a weapon system’s product support package before fielding and the difference between a log demo and technical manual verification. TSARC considers the log demo a higher priority event to source with appropriate MOS-qualified Soldiers, given the return on investment for the Army in proving out the maintenance concept and baseline product support strategy.
There are several ongoing initiatives to help reduce resourcing requirements while maintaining an acceptable level of risk for weapon system materiel release decisions, specifically in the area of supportability. The most notable initiative with regard to sourcing is a proposal to change the language of Army Regulation 25-30, Army Publishing Program. AR 25-30 currently requires that technical manual verification be conducted 100 percent hands-on by Soldiers, meaning that every step of the manual is executed by the users. Recently, the U.S. Army Combined Arms Support Command (CASCOM) and HQDA G-3/5/7 have made formal requests to include a requirement of less than 100 percent hands-on technical manual verification and an option to use government civilian personnel in lieu of Soldiers. These proposals were also presented at the June council of colonels TSARC and approved at the June general officers TSARC. These requested changes, if accepted by Office of the Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the Army, would allow greater flexibility when evaluating the usability and accuracy of technical manuals, and create a more agile publication development process.
The TSARC encourages requesting organizations to continue to pursue Soldiers in support of all test events, including the technical manual verification. However, the TSARC also encourages development of a plan B in the event the TSARC cannot source the event with Soldiers. This is a shift in the technical manual verification culture; once approved, pilot events would begin with the future policy and process updates to follow. This would take six to 12 months to incorporate the proposed policy changes and another year or two to implement fully. Opening up the support resource pool to include civilians presents potential relief to strained Soldier resources. This guidance is in the formal approval process, coordinated among ASA(ALT), ATEC, TRADOC, the U.S. Army Materiel Command, CASCOM and HQDA.
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.
TSARC coordinates a lot of moving pieces, managing resources for Army tests, multiservice operational T&E, joint T&E, and other events. Through working groups, conferences and small- group sessions, TSARC gets the most out of its limited resources while minimizing impacts of testing on unit operational readiness. (Image courtesy of the authors and the U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center)
CONCLUSION
The Army has much work to do to apply these proposed changes, and is well on its way to making other changes to the outdated technical manual processes. A proposal is on the table to implement a three-pronged approach:
Leverage additional resources (government civilian personnel) to source the technical manual verifications, reducing the demand on Soldiers.
Use a CASCOM-proposed sampling methodology in lieu of the current 100 percent hands-on approach, effectively reducing timelines for events.
Combine log demo and technical manual verification events for low-risk Acquisition Category III programs, condensing the resources required and alleviating the demand.
There are several upcoming opportunities in FY18 to pilot the use of government civilians and a proposed sampling methodology. These pilots could be a mechanism to gain insight and feedback on the implementation of a more agile and flexible technical manual development process. The results will be key to supporting the chief of staff of the Army’s No. 1 priority, readiness.
MS. LAURA PEGHER is the lead T&E coordinator for ASA(ALT). She holds an M.S. in engineering management from George Washington University and a B.S. in electrical engineering from The Pennsylvania State University, and is a licensed professional engineer. She has Army acquisition experience in science and technology and project management, and has coordinated testing for the Army for seven years, including log demo and technical manual verifications. A member of the Army Acquisition Corps (AAC), she is Level III certified in T&E, in engineering and in program management.
MR. ADAM BUSSEY is a T&E coordinator for ASA(ALT). He holds a B.S. in mechanical engineering from The Pennsylvania State University. He has over 10 years of Army test experience and has coordinated large-scale developmental tests for the Army. A member of the AAC, he is Level III certified in T&E and Level I certified in program management and in engineering.
MS. AMBER DUFOUR is a logistics management specialist for the deputy assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition policy and logistics in Arlington, Virginia. She holds an M.A. in management, with a concentration in project management, and a B.S. in mathematics, both from Notre Dame of Maryland University. She has worked in numerous areas of acquisition during more than 10 years of service, including T&E, acquisition logistics, life cycle logistics, project and program management and Army integrated product support policies. A member of the AAC, she is Level III certified in T&E and in life cycle logistics.
The Army is joining forces with industry to achieve land power dominance through science and technology.
The future Army must be ready to deploy, fight and win decisively against any adversary, anytime and anywhere, as well as to operate in a joint, multidomain, high-intensity conflict, while simultaneously deterring others and maintaining agility to conduct irregular warfare. While the Army has been at war, the world witnessed the value and impact that technology brings to the battlefield and how capabilities, enabled by such technology innovations, are critical to the success of our Soldiers.
Similarly, our adversaries studied the Army’s successes and challenges, then mimicked many of those successes and hence avoided many pitfalls in an attempt to bring themselves to near-peer status. However, they will not succeed in their efforts, because when it comes to creating and deploying cutting-edge technology, the keystone is research and development, empowered by the scientific workforce and how it views and solves problems.
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.
Researchers from the U.S. Army Research Laboratory and the U.S. Army Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center make use of innovations from industry partner Diversified Technical Systems Inc. (DTS), which developed these Gen 1 ATDs—anthropomorphic test devices. (Photo courtesy of DTS)
Articles in this special edition highlight several Army modernization research activities designed for the Army to fight tomorrow’s wars with the right equipment. The Army’s science and technology (S&T) mission is to enable Soldiers to dominate the battlefield, both today and in the future. Research and development is a key part of the Army’s modernization strategy. It focuses on maturing technology, reducing program risk, developing technology demonstrators and experimental prototypes to better define affordable and achievable requirements, and conducting experimentation with Soldiers to refine new operational concepts.
S&T is an investment in the Army’s future, whereby we nurture innovation and drive toward new leap-ahead technologies with game-changing potential, evaluate technology and system vulnerabilities, and address issues such as affordability, sustainability, reliability and manufacturability early on during a system’s design phase.
The Army’s S&T enterprise comprises more than 25,000 scientists and engineers, including civilians and on-site contractors, who are essential to developing near-term fixes for our Soldiers’ urgent needs. The Army’s scientist and engineer network operationalized and delivered numerous capabilities to support Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom during the better part of the last few decades. The understanding of Army operations forms the foundation of innovative mid- and far-term capabilities being developed for the Army of tomorrow.
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.
The Army’s long-range precision fires priority seeks to restore Army dominance in range, lethality, mobility, precision and target acquisition. The Extended Range Cannon Artillery project at U.S. Army Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona includes the XM1113 projectile, which surpassed 60 kilometers in May, and the Hyper Velocity Projectile, which has exceeded Yuma’s testing space. (U.S. Army photo)
A FOCUSED EFFORT
The S&T enterprise is dedicated to continuously meeting the needs of the Soldier, but we compete with the private sector and academia for critical technology and technical talent. We must execute faster and with higher impact to address current capability shortfalls, outpace anticipated threats and defeat technology solutions being adopted by our adversaries.
Technology is global, and the Army competes for the highest-caliber technology and talent. To retain overmatch in an open and pervasive technological environment, we must apply our resources thoughtfully to develop and employ the technologies that will provide the greatest military advantage.
The secretary of the Army and the chief of staff of the Army have identified six modernization priorities that address our most pressing operational needs to ensure overmatch against potential near-peer competitors. Army research and development programs and resourcing have been realigned to focus on developing the six priority areas:
Long-range precision fires—Platforms, capabilities, munitions and formations that restore Army dominance in range, lethality, mobility, precision and target acquisition.
Next Generation Combat Vehicles—Combat vehicles that integrate other close combat capabilities in manned, unmanned and optionally manned teaming. These vehicles will leverage semi-autonomous and autonomous platforms in conjunction with the most modern firepower, protection, mobility and power generation capabilities necessary for our future combat formations to fight and win against any foe in any environment.
Future Vertical Lift—A set of manned, unmanned and optionally manned platforms that can execute attack, lift and reconnaissance missions on the modern and future battlefield at greater range, altitude, lethality and payload.
Network and command, control, communications and intelligence—An integrated system of hardware, software and infrastructure that is sufficiently mobile, reliable, user-friendly, discreet in signature and expeditionary to enable Soldiers to fight effectively in any environment where the electromagnetic spectrum is denied or degraded.
Air and missile defense—A series of mobile integrated platforms, capabilities, munitions and formations that ensure that our future combat formations are lethal while remaining protected from modern and advanced air- and missile-delivered fires, including drones.
Soldier lethality—A holistic series of capabilities, equipment, training and enhancements that span all fundamentals of combat, including shooting, moving, communicating, protecting and sustaining, to make our Soldiers more lethal and less vulnerable on the modern battlefield. This will include not only next-generation individual and squad weapons but also improved body armor, sensors, radios and load-bearing exoskeletons in concert with optimized human performance and decision-making.
Image may be NSFW. Clik here to view.
The Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck A4 is one of the vehicles that will be used to demonstrate the Tactical Vehicle Electrification Kit, which aims to improve vehicle operational energy, range and future electrical systems. The kit reflects the Army priority to deliver Next Generation Combat Vehicles with the most modern firepower, protection, mobility and power generation capabilities. (Photo courtesy of Oshkosh Defense)
IN SEARCH OF INNOVATION
Innovation is an important part of the Army’s strategy to provide the right capability to the Soldier at the right time. The Army makes use of innovations from industry and other partners whenever possible, and we encourage industry to bring innovative technologies and solutions forward to explore the full ideation space and the art of the possible.
With approximately 23 million companies in the United States, the Army only does business with about 5,000 of them. Having recently come from industry and knowing the challenges associated with entering “the process” of defense acquisition, I submit that the Army must engage proactively and aggressively with all innovators to see what new ideas, concepts, systems and subsystem components they can demonstrate.
Private sector innovation, especially from nontraditional sources, is critical to the Army’s future. I have embarked on a new strategy for soliciting innovative, paradigm-breaking technologies from the startup and nontraditional community to support the Army’s modernization priorities. The first engagement within the new innovation strategy began in June 2018 with the launch of the Expeditionary Technology Search (xTechSearch). It serves as a catalyst for the Army to engage with the nontraditional business sector, driving American innovation to meet Army challenges and spurring economic growth.
Aimed at attracting game-changing innovation, xTechSearch will provide access and venues to pitch novel technology solutions directly to Army leadership. So far, xTechSearch has hosted several outreach events across the country to engage with American innovators and spark the development of leap-ahead technologies for the future Army. The Army will provide non-dilutive seed prizes—money that doesn’t require giving up shares of their businesses—for companies to demonstrate proof of concept for their technology solutions.
Strategic land power dominance is critical to the Army for prompt, sustained and synchronized operations with a force customized to the mission and poised to win in all domains. For the imaginable future, the nation’s land power dominance will continue to rely on significant S&T advances to ensure a competitive advantage.
We will look everywhere for opportunities to accelerate innovation and to deliver advanced technologies that enable our Soldiers to win decisively.
FORT BELVOIR, Va. (Nov. 16, 2018) You may ask yourself…what is the project director (PD) centralized selection board?
This civilian-centric board is a high priority talent management initiative championed by the Director, Army Acquisition Corps (DAAC). The board identifies high performing civilians possessing leadership potential to fill civilian PD positions commensurate with their military counterparts, ensuring the Army meets the future needs of our Soldiers. The standard tenure for acquisition PDs is three years. The Director, Acquisition Career Management (DACM) Office, in coordination with the program executive offices, centrally manages the positions.
Entering its fifth year of execution, this year’s centralized selection board piloted a combined PD FY19 and FY20 selection at the GS-15 level in an effort to better align the PD selection cycle with the centralized selection list (CSL) product/project manager board’s selection process. Currently, the PD cycle is offset by a year from the CSL process mainly due to selection and slating timelines.
The FY19 and FY20 acquisition PD centralized selection board was held August 6–10, 2018 at Fort Knox, Ky. Four GS-15 candidates from the Army Acquisition Corps were selected as principal PDs and 12 candidates were selected as alternates.
The slating for the PD positions will be announced in January and February 2019.
Congratulations to the following FY19 and FY20 PD selectees:
Principal List
Edward Gozdur, Program Executive Office (PEO) Aviation Shawn Gresham, PEO Aviation (FY20 CSL Project Manager Principal Select) Patrick Layden, PEO Aviation Brian Raftery, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology)
Alternate List
Craig Besaw, PEO Aviation Alvin Bing , PEO Combat Support & Combat Service Support (CS&CSS) Kevin Curry, PEO Enterprise Information Systems Raymond Folden, PEO CS&CSS Lee James III, Senior Service College-Eisenhower Mark McCoy, PEO Ground Combat Systems John McFassel, Joint Program Executive Office Armaments & Ammunition George Mitchell, Missile Defense Agency Stanley Niemiec, PEO Command, Control, Communications – Tactical (C3T) David Pinckley, PEO Intelligence, Electronic Warfare & Sensors Steven Rienstra, PEO CS&CSS Dennis Teefy, PEO C3T
Expeditionary Technology Search narrows Army-funded competition from over 350 proposals to 12 contenders for $200,000 award.
by Dr. Matt Willis and Jennifer Smith
When Dr. Bruce Jette, assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology (ASA(ALT)), launched the Army Expeditionary Technology Search (xTechSearch) in June 2018, the focus was to start a conversation, lower barriers to engaging industry and build trust with small businesses and startups. Thus they could rapidly develop new, innovative technologies for the Army using a new paradigm of prize competitions, thus connecting with small nontraditional businesses in a way that cuts bureaucracy and streamlines cumbersome administrative processes, while increasing mentoring and partnership opportunities.
Dr. Thomas P. Russell, deputy assistant secretary of the Army for research and technology (DASA(R&T)), said that xTechSearch “gives us the potential for future capabilities, but the bigger impact is getting people aware of the things we’re interested in.”
Accordingly, the Army structured the xTechSearch program as a prize competition with a minimal requirement for entry—a 1,000-word whitepaper describing the technology. To maximize outreach to elements of the technology sector that traditionally would not do business with DOD, the Army advertised xTechSearch broadly, including on Challenge.gov, FedBizOps, venture capital platforms and media venues including national media (e.g., Engadget, Mashable), government periodicals, Twitter and Facebook. As the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) described xTechSearch on its website, the solicitation requested “innovative technologies and ideas” from the nontraditional defense community—from concepts to fielded products—“that can solve Army challenges” for the future battlefield by supporting its six modernization priorities.
More than 350 companies submitted papers for Phase I of the competition. The companies represented a wide spectrum of the country, including 42 states; 70 percent of those companies had no previous engagement with the Army, with 40 percent of those having no previous engagement with the government.
THE SELECTION PROCESS
After a rigorous technical review of the whitepapers, senior technologists from several Army laboratories and scientists, engineers and operators from ARL, the Army Capabilities Integration Center, U.S. Army Special Operations Command and the DASA(R&T) selected 125 companies, or 35 percent of those that had submitted technology concepts. Over 100 Army scientists, engineers and warfighters participated in the technical review.
Each of the 125 companies received $1,000 and an invitation to Phase II of xTechSearch, in which they would pitch their concepts to a panel of Army experts, including laboratory scientists and engineers, operators and technology transfer leads. During this phase, each company identified the ARL Open Campus location, of several across the country, where they wanted to make their venture capital-style pitches. The locations included Playa Vista, California; Chicago; Austin, Texas; Boston; and Adelphi, Maryland.
ARL’s Open Campus concept is a science and technology ecosystem that encourages groundbreaking advances in basic and applied research areas of relevance to the Army. Through the Open Campus framework, Army scientists and engineers work collaboratively, usually in the same location, with visiting scientists from academia and industry. The panel of experts evaluated each pitch based on its potential to impact or revolutionize the Army, its scientific and engineering viability, and the product team’s experience and abilities.
After review, the Army invited 25 companies to Phase III of xTechSearch. Phase III conferred a $5,000 prize and exhibit space in the Innovator’s Corner at the 2018 Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Annual Meeting and Exposition in October in Washington.
During the Phase II and Phase III events, companies also had the opportunity to network with Army representatives from the laboratories’ small business and technology transfer offices in a low-pressure environment that broke down perceived barriers between industry and the military. Karl Kappra, ARL’s chief of strategy management, stated that “xTechSearch provided an opportunity for small businesses to make government labs aware of their innovative ideas. Then, working with our military, we can collaborate with them to give them insight on how they could tailor their ideas to support Army modernization priorities.”
The networking was also valuable to the Army; Russell said the bigger impact of the xTechSearch competition was “increasing our network of people in our ecosystem and to try and think about how we solve Army problems.” Feedback from one company was that the networking talk opened up many new possibilities.
CONCLUSION
Phase III culminated in Russell announcing the 12 finalists at the AUSA event, with Jette attending to provide his congratulations. (See insert for the list of finalists.) Each of the 12 received $125,000 and an invitation to participate in the final phase of xTechSearch, a capstone demonstration in spring 2019 in which the companies will showcase a technology proof of concept to Army leadership. At the capstone demonstration, one company will receive the top $200,000 award.
For the long run, the major benefit that all the companies gained from the xTechSearch competition was understanding the spectrum of opportunities that exist to engage with the Army research community. In addition, through the questions and concerns presented by the small businesses, the companies began to understand the technical challenges the Army is trying to solve—without all the red tape.
The Army plans additional xTechSearch initiatives in 2019, showcasing it again at the Innovator’s Corner of the AUSA Global Force Symposium and Exposition, scheduled for March 26–28 in Huntsville, Alabama. The conversation for innovative solutions to Army challenges will continue.
DR. MATT WILLIS is the director for laboratory management in the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research and Technology (ODASA(R&T)). As such, he shapes policies that impact the workforce, infrastructure, technology transfer, and science, technology, engineering and mathematics educational outreach at the Army science and technology research laboratories. He holds a Ph.D. and an M.S. in chemical engineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a B.S. in chemical engineering from Cornell University. He is Level II certified in S&T management and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps.
MS. JENNIFER SMITH was detailed during 2018 from the Engineer Research and Development Center‘s Geospatial Research Laboratory to (ODASA(R&T)) and served as the deputy director for laboratory management. She holds an M.S. in geospatial intelligence from George Mason University and a B.S. in physical science from the University of Maryland.
And the finalists are:
Adranos Inc.
Aeronics Inc.
Blacksand Technology LLC
Cuberg Inc.
Hivemapper
Hyperdyne Inc.
Nodar Inc.
Notch Inc.
Sempulse LLC
TangiTek LLC
WildSpark Technologies LLC
Wiser Systems Inc.
This article will be published in the January – March 2019 issue of Army AL&T magazine.
FORT BELVOIR, Va. (April 24, 2019)—“Building the Acquisition Team”—creating the best possible workforce to supply our warfighters with the best possible capabilities—is the theme of the Spring 2019 issue of Army AL&T magazine. In it, read about:
How Dr. Bruce D. Jette, the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology (ASA(ALT)) and the Army acquisition executive, sees this critical time of Army modernization as an opportunity to modernize the acquisition enterprise and effect the changes that will ensure not only that we build the best acquisition team to meet the needs of future warfighters, but also meet the challenges of the marketplace, in “BUILDING THE ARMY ACQUISITION TEAM.”
The Army Rapid Capabilities Office (now the Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office, or RCCTO) and the Project Manager for Electronic Warfare and Cyber teamed up to address an urgent need for U.S. Army Europe and, in the process, set an award-winning example of phased prototyping, experimentation and fielding with creative resourcing, in “THE MAKING OF A PACKARD.”
The need is clear: Army acquisition must no longer be process-oriented, time-consuming and risk-averse, taking years to deliver a product. Enter the dynamic duo of middle-tier acquisition and other transaction authorities, in “THE NEED FOR SPEED.”
The Program Executive Office for Command, Control and Communications – Tactical, the first in a series of profiles of ASA(ALT) organizations, in “ASA(ALT) AT WORK.”
When supplying partner nations through foreign military sales, the best possible equipment may not always be the best possible solution, in “RADIO ANASOC.”
Dr. John P. Kotter, who first as a Harvard Business School professor and now as a consultant, has become the go-to authority on leadership and organizational change, in “CHANGE AGENT.”
How the Combat Casualty Care Research Program of the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command is working to make its “Stop the Bleed” campaign—training to treat traumatic hemorrhage—as ubiquitous as CPR training, in “‘STOP THE BLEED’: The Simple Art of Saving Lives.”
Be sure to check out our new platform for the Army AL&T e-magazine, at https://asc.army.mil/web/publications/army-alt-magazine/. It’s the same great publication but on a spiffed-up site that makes it easier to read, share and save the commentary, analyses and workforce development news you rely on and contribute. In addition to making Army AL&T easy to navigate on a desktop computer, the new platform uses a mobile-friendly format to make the magazine just as easy to read on a smartphone or tablet.
Also, remember that Army AL&T is built on contributions from you, the Army Acquisition Workforce. For more information on how to publish an article in Army AL&T magazine or a Faces of the Force submission, visit http://asc.army.mil/web/publications/ to see our writers guidelines, upcoming deadlines and themes.
Don’t forget to check out ASA(ALT) for news and information at the acquisition leadership level!
From Sun Tzu to machine learning, having good data is more than half the battle. The Army’s acquisition data domain promises to prove that once again.
by Maj. Mario Iglesias
In the year 500 B.C., the Chinese philosopher-general Sun Tzu stated, “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.” Sun Tzu understood how properly using data allowed leaders to make critical decisions that would lead to victory or defeat. Fast-forward to the present day, and the importance of synthesizing data continues to grow in modern militaries. Gen. Mark A. Milley, chief of staff of the Army, highlighted that lesson from Sun Tzu when he said, “The Army lacks the ability to see self.”
He and other senior leaders throughout the Army understand that accessing, visualizing and leveraging data has become a mission-essential task. Milley’s statement in November 2017 launched the Army Leader Dashboard, a system designed to enable senior Army leaders to see data on all aspects of the Army, from personnel to logistics and acquisitions. The ongoing development of the dashboard has highlighted holes in our current data map, one of the largest gaps being the data surrounding our acquisition programs.
All of defense acquisition is characterized by the constant gathering of data. Every bit of a program must be documented, from need statement to requirements to every step of development. Every program has reams of data. Yet it has never been collected and managed at the enterprise level in any automated or systemic way.
The Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (OASA(ALT)), for example, has always required programs to provide data for milestone decisions and in response to requests for information made by leaders and decision-makers. The milestone decision authority (MDA) will require updated cost estimates, test data and a detailed schedule before approving a program’s advance to the next phase of its acquisition life cycle.
Such data is collected, analyzed and provided in an easy-to-understand manner for the MDA and other stakeholders so they can confidently assess that the program should continue development and fielding. However, what the acquisition community has lacked are common tools across the enterprise that can store and provide the data for the dashboard to ingest before or after these milestone events. This is a problem for acquisition leaders and resource managers who need programmatic data at all points of a program’s life cycle. This clear gap is both a challenge and an opportunity for the acquisition community to finally develop the tools that will fill the data gap and allow current and future leaders to make better decisions.
BUILDING THE ACQUISITION DATA DOMAIN
Dr. Bruce D. Jette, the Army acquisition executive, has developed the framework for the Army’s acquisition data domain (ADD), which will be how the Army identifies, collects, manages and analyzes data throughout all Army programs’ life cycles—what it will look like and how it will function. The acquisition data domain will collect and link data from a program’s inception as an idea through its development, production, fielding, sustainment and demilitarization. The larger domain will then interlink these subdomains so that leaders can understand the impacts of accelerating or divesting capabilities that are being developed.
Without such data, the acquisition community will not begin to leverage advanced analytical tools, such as artificial intelligence or machine learning. To do so, it needs access to the structured data that makes up programs. Building the ADD will require significant shifts in the business processes and tools that are used for all aspects of program management.
PROGRAM TOOLS
Last August, the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Plans, Programs and Resources began a pilot program to build out the business management portion of the ADD, one of its domains. It is are currently piloting the Air Force-developed system known as Project Management Resource Tools (PMRT). The PMRT system has been in use for more than 20 years and comprises multiple modules for managing and visualizing programmatic and financial data.
The benefit to using a tool that another service has developed is the “speed to market” and design maturity. PMRT is already approved to operate on the Army network and is vertically aligned with Office of the Secretary of Defense reporting requirements.
Many of the program offices are currently using Microsoft Excel to manage billion-dollar programs. PMRT will replace these inaccessible spreadsheets and automate the way program offices manage their finances. However, some program offices and program executive offices (PEOs) have tools for managing their financial data. ASA(ALT) will work with these program offices to ingest data into PMRT when possible. Moving from no tools—or several sets of tools—to a single tool used Armywide will mark a major cultural shift.
DATA CULTURAL SHIFT AT ALL LEVELS
The data transformation within the acquisition community will succeed only if the community, at all levels, actively takes part in the cultural shift. It will require users in the program offices to change tools and business processes while leaders at the executive level learn how to leverage the data that is being collected.
At the program office level, individuals must change how they conduct business and use the tools that will capture data as they work. The data in the system will only be useful to decision-makers if it is timely and accurate. Changing the tools and process will inevitably incur a transition cost, such as for training and business process re-engineering, but it will be imperative for the success of these efforts. As the tools become more trusted, the amount of requests for information that inundate the program offices will be dramatically reduced.
At the staff level, the PEO and ASA(ALT) staffs will need to learn how to use the new data tools to collect information quickly without interfering with the program offices’ work. Additionally, the various domain managers will need to identify and adopt tools that will encourage program offices to use them. They also generally must be easy to use at various levels.
At the executive level, senior leaders will need to receive their information from the tools on the system. All of their briefs and updates on programs and various initiatives should be sourced from the various data tools that program offices and staffs are managing. Leadership also will need to exhibit patience and understanding, as there will be a learning curve and problems associated with using the new data tools. Additionally, leaders must leverage the data populated in the standardized reports in order to reduce rework by the staff.
TRANSFORMING DATA CULTURE
People who have been in ASA(ALT) for a while may have seen other efforts to transform how the organization uses data start and fail. The recent sunsetting of the Product Manager for Acquisition Business is the latest casualty in a list of ASA(ALT) data missteps. It is fair to ask how this new effort will be different from previous failed attempts. The answer is, there are a number of significant factors that will separate this effort from others:
Senior leader support. Reforming how the acquisition community makes decisions based on data is a top priority for the current ASA(ALT). Jette has maintained a focus on improving the way the organization uses data. His involvement ensures that the ADD initiative will receive the resources and advocacy necessary for making a large organizational change. Previous efforts did not have this continued senior leader involvement.
Learning from successful transitions. ASA(ALT) can benefit greatly by learning from commercial companies that have made large-scale, successful transitions. Recently ASA(ALT) hired McKinsey & Co., an international consulting firm, to develop a road map for building an ASA(ALT) data team and a detailed plan for realizing the acquisition domain. McKinsey has successfully completed similar projects with leading financial and telecommunication companies.
Technology advances. Over the last decade, there have been significant capability advances in cloud computing and software for managing data. The previous efforts created tools that were clunky and operated unacceptably slowly on the network. Tools today have slick user interfaces, and their capabilities continue to increase.
ASA(ALT) lessons learned. ASA(ALT) has a wealth of institutional knowledge on previous data transformation attempts. The current data team is reviewing the earlier efforts to learn what was effective and what was ineffective. As a result, ASA(ALT) is taking steps to mitigate the known risks and leverage the experience of those who worked on the previous data transformations.
DEMOCRATIZATION OF DATA
Currently, the acquisition community collects and presents data for decision-makers at key milestones, but only at key milestones. However, the development of an automated system will allow for users at all levels to begin leveraging data throughout the acquisition enterprise to conduct their jobs more effectively. This concept is known as democratization of the data and is practiced in parts of industry.
There will be appropriate limitations on who can access and edit data, based on roles within the organization, but there won’t be limits on access to the tools themselves. Once users see how these tools can help them complete their jobs, they will become more invested in maintaining and learning how to use them. With sufficient tools, the Army could optimize Army investments and programs to maximize lethality over the next decade.
Companies like Amazon and Google maintain a sizable advantage over their competitors by collecting and leveraging data better than their peers. Everyone within a company has access to the data they need, when they need it—in other words, it’s democratized. Industry has seen the benefits of data management and continues to invest billions every year into information technology systems and analytical tools that identify opportunities to increase revenue and reduce risk.
Many of these organizations are migrating legacy systems to fast and efficient cloud-computing centers such as Microsoft Azure or Amazon Web Services. Once the data is centralized, companies are able to visualize it and apply analytical tools, allowing better, more efficient decisions. These companies have demonstrated that leveraging data is essential for competing and winning in today’s marketplace; the same will be true on tomorrow’s battlefields.
CONCLUSION
It has become apparent that the acquisition community needs to invest in better tools and systems in order to effectively coordinate modernization of the Army. Now is the time for ASA(ALT) to radically change how the culture manages the data and decisions that allow the Army to optimize modernization.
MAJ. MARIO IGLESIAS is the strategic data team lead in ASA(ALT)’s Strategic Initiatives Group at the Pentagon. He holds an MBA from Yale University and a B.S. in economics from the United States Military Academy at West Point. He is Level III certified in program management and Level II in contracting, and is a member of the Army Acquisition Corps.
This article is published in the Summer 2019 issue of Army AL&T magazine.
