Naval Analytical Capabilities Improving Capabilities-Based Planning (2005) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
Pages 1-13
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
The committee was tasked to address key elements of CBP, examine Navy analytical processes, assess current Navy CBP processes and evaluation tools, and recommend an approach to making improvements. The study effort was to be short term, with a relatively rapid response provided to the Navy.
|
From page 2... ...
As follow-up to the QDR, the Secretary of Defense commissioned a task force -- the Joint Defense Capabilities Study Team -- led by the former Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, which recommended "a capabilities-based process for identifying needs, creating choices, developing solutions, and providing capabilities."2 In October 2003, the Secretary of Defense accepted many of the recommendations that appeared soon thereafter in the final, published report of the task force and issued implementing guidance for adopting CBP in the budget development process.3 Although the basic principles of capabilities-based planning and analysis are not new, they have not been emphasized within the DOD in recent decades. Even today there is no consensus within the department about precisely what CBP is and what its essential elements are.
|
From page 3... ...
5See Chapter 4 for full definitions of these terms. Briefly, future force/program planning is the process by which the DOD builds its biennial budget proposals for the funding of future capabilities, whereas in operational planning, operational commanders devise and promulgate courses of action for any number of possible situations requiring the use of military capabilities currently available.
|
From page 4... ...
However, the Navy should not delay in making internal improvements if the broader DOD community is slower in developing good CBP activities, is not as well focused, or cannot achieve consensus about the direction it will take.6 6 Any of these eventualities could be likely in the broader DOD community, given the current lack of consensus on CBP priorities and activities across different elements of the DOD (as observed by committee members in this effort and elsewhere)
|
From page 5... ...
.7 The committee 7This is reflected in the "Initiation of a Joint Capabilities Development Process" memorandum of October 31, 2003, from the Secretary of Defense to the Service Secretaries, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and others (Office of the Secretary of Defense, Washington, D.C.) , setting a goal and issuing guidance to "achieve a streamlined and collaborative, yet competitive, process that produces fully integrated joint warfighting capabilities."
|
From page 6... ...
The criteria for implementing Recommendation 1 include the following: The work accomplished should be joint and output-oriented, with the ability to actually execute operations as output. Successful CBP will require analysis over a broader scenario space, extensive exploratory analysis within selected scenarios, development of options both to solve capability problems and to achieve efficiencies, and portfolio-style assessments of those options at different levels of detail.
|
From page 7... ...
Assessment of Personnel and Organizations The criterion of the committee for its assessment of current Navy CBP processes, tools, and related activities in the area of personnel and organizations 9Department of Defense.
|
From page 8... ...
A particularly deficient element in the Navy's current ability to support capabilities-based planning relates, as mentioned above, to providing options for choice in portfolio-style analysis modules suitable for decision making by the CNO and the Secretary of Defense. Presenting broad, discerning, strategic-level analysis for the CNO requires a higher level of analysis than that characteristic of operations research or systems analysis.
|
From page 9... ...
The committee believes that the Navy needs to change some current manpower and personnel policies to enhance its ability to build a longer-term, high-quality OPNAV staff with enhanced capabilities to perform excellent capabilities-based planning and analysis. A key element of those changes should involve creating career paths for future leaders in order to introduce such individuals early to the discipline of analytical thinking in a real-world context (e.g., the analysis for, preparation of, and review of the Navy Program Objective Memorandum (POM)
|
From page 10... ...
It is therefore important for the Navy to assume a strong role both in influencing the DOD process as it evolves and in structuring Navy program proposals in ways that are responsive to the guidance from the Secretary of Defense. Assessment of Analytic Frameworks, Tools, and Their Use The criterion of the committee for assessment of the use of analytic frameworks and analytic tools within the larger DOD environment is whether Navy frameworks and uses of these tools are suitable for effective work in the larger DOD environment.
|
From page 11... ...
The naval forces taken together, after all, have remarkable current and potential capabilities. The Navy also has a long history of conducting detailed quantitative analysis at several levels of aggregation in support of both Navy program planning and the operational planning of naval component commanders.
|
From page 12... ...
Navy leadership should also reassess periodically its success or failure in getting adequate linkage between Navy and DOD-wide decompositions of defense functional capabilities and adjust its program as necessary to be fully effective in the broader DOD capabilities-based planning and analysis processes. Assessment of Personnel and Organizations The criterion of the committee for its assessment of the effectiveness of Navy personnel and organizations in the larger DOD environment is the quality of Navy participation and influence in the OSD- and the OJCS-led capabilitiesbased planning efforts.
|
From page 13... ...
Currently, the most logical place for this assignment would be in the Office of the DCNO for Resources, Requirements, and Assessments, because the processes involved in capabilities-based planning include resource-allocation issues across all force and support areas. However, the decision on how best to accomplish the tasking for such a central activity should logically follow from or be consistent with the model chosen by the CNO to ensure having a highly competent analytical group to support the CNO in all aspects of capabilities-based planning.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.