Optimizing U.S. Air Force and Department of Defense Review of Air Force Acquisition Programs (2009) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
1 Introduction
1 Introduction
Pages 5-15
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 5... ...
The committee's tasking is shown in Box 1-1. Background DOD spends over $300 billion per year to develop, produce, field, and sustain weapons systems. Too often, DOD weapons systems programs experience large cost overruns and schedule delays, contributing to a growing loss of confidence ee DOD (U.S.
|
From page 6... ...
Review the prescribed program reviews and assessments that U.S. Air Force space and non-space system acquisition programs in all Depart ment of Defense (DOD)
|
From page 7... ...
This formal DOD review process has evolved over the past 60 years, with many of the changes intended to address acquisition program cost overruns, schedule delays, and performance shortfalls in the delivered product, service, or system. Since implementation of the Goldwater-Nichols Act in the late 1980s, the main defense acquisition organizations (e.g., the program management offices)
|
From page 8... ...
Dillard, Centralized Control of Defense Acquisition Programs: A Comparative Review of the Framework from 1987 to 2003, NPS-AM-03-003, Acquisition Research Sponsored Report Series, September 2003, Monterey, Calif.: Naval Postgraduate School. Program Initiation Engineering and Materiel Manufacturing Production and User Needs and Technology Development Deployment Solution Operations Technology Development Analysis System Capability Production Full Rate and Support Opportunities Integrated and Manufacturing Readiness, LRIP, Production System Design Process and IOT&E and Demonstration Deployment MDD Figure 1-1 broadside A B PCDRA C FRP FIGURE 1-2 Revised major defense acquisition decision reviews and phases.
|
From page 9... ...
Over the past decade, the emergence of network-enabled programs that require significant interoperability across multiple platforms, weapons, sensor systems, and military services has substantially contributed to complexity and cost of many acquisition programs, complicating program management and the oversight processes. Beyond decision reviews for major defense acquisition programs at each milestone (A, B, and C)
|
From page 10... ...
, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics; SECAF, Secretary of the Air Force; CSAF, Chief of Staff of the Air Force; MAJCOM HQ, Major Command Headquarters; SAE, Service Acquisition Executive, SAF/AQ, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition; PEO, Program Executive Officer; PM, Program Manager. 526 Figure 1-3 as an Air Force Review Board (AFRB)
|
From page 11... ...
A B DRR PCDRA) C FRP Milestones Concept OSD and OIPT OIPT OIPT OIPT OIPT OIPT Joint Staff PSR PSR PSR JROC JROC JROC JROC ASP AFRB ASP AFRB ASP AFRB ADM, LCMP, SEP, ISP, & PMD Air Force Sufficiency Reviews Configuration Steering Boards AFROCC AFROCC AFROCC TRA IBR TRR OTRR Program LHA CDR SVR/FCA Execution SRR ASR SFR PDR MRA PRR PCA Figure 1-4 DOD-Air Force milestone and program review process.
|
From page 12... ...
Numerous recent studies,,10 have addressed the cost overruns and delays experienced by DOD acquisition programs over the past few decades. In brief, despite continued attempts to improve the acquisition process, in part through the addition of reviews, acquisition programs continue to experience cost overruns, schedule delays, and/or as-delivered performance shortfalls.
|
From page 13... ...
That said, the committee recognizes the opportunity to contribute in a substantive way by examining the expenses a PM incurs from the growing array of program and technical review in terms of time spent supporting reviews and in time lost focusing on program execution. A key question then is this: Can changes in the number, content, or sequence of program reviews help the program manager execute the program more successfully?
|
From page 14... ...
The survey was designed to collect information from Air Force PMs and PEOs on external reviews they had experienced. Survey information included quantitative and qualitative data on the impact of external reviews on program execution, including the time and effort spent preparing for, participating in, and following up on actions resulting from such reviews.
|
From page 15... ...
Additionally, the committee decided to construct a program review matrix (Table 2-1) to present a holistic view of the array of typical reviews (and accompanying prereviews)
|
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.