addressing the barriers to agile development in dod · structuring an agile program ... agile...

The author's affiliation with The MITRE Corporation is provided for identification purposes only, and is not intended to convey or imply MITRE's concurrence with, or support for, the positions, opinions or viewpoints expressed by the author

Su Chang [email protected] Pete Modigliani [email protected] May 2015

Addressing the Barriers to Agile Development in DoD

MITRE Defense Agile Acquisition Guide

Naval Postgraduate School’s 2015 Defense Acquisition Research Symposium

Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited. Case Number 15-1457

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.mitre.org/publications/technical-papers/defense-agile-acquisition-guide-tailoring-dod-it-acquisition-program

Report Documentation Page Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, ArlingtonVA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if itdoes not display a currently valid OMB control number.

1. REPORT DATE MAY 2015 2. REPORT TYPE

3. DATES COVERED 00-00-2015 to 00-00-2015

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Addressing the Barriers to Agile Development in DoD

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) MITRE Corporation,515 Colshire Drive,McLean,VA,22102

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Presented at the 12th Annual Acquisition Research Symposium held May 13-14, 2015 in Monterey, CA.

14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT Same as

Report (SAR)

18. NUMBEROF PAGES

19

19a. NAME OFRESPONSIBLE PERSON

a. REPORT unclassified

b. ABSTRACT unclassified

c. THIS PAGE unclassified

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

| 2 |

© 2015 The MITRE Corporation. 'Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited. Case Number 15-1457'

Purpose / Outline

How DoD Acquisition professionals can apply Agile concepts

within the unique and complex Defense Acquisition Environment DoD IT Acquisition Challenges Agile Overview Program Structure Requirements Contracting

| 3 |


DoD IT Acquisition Challenges

Change in IT technology and operations is outpacing DoD IT acquisition development IT programs are subject to extensive documentation, reviews,

and oversight that inhibits speed and agility needed for IT Major DoD systems average 38% cost, 27 month schedule

overrun with >$1B/year spent on programs that are cancelled* Congress is demanding DoD to reform IT acquisition

– Early and continual user involvement – Multiple, rapidly executed capability releases – Early, successful prototypes; evolutionary approach – Modular open systems approach

DoD: Delivering Yesterday’s Technology Tomorrow

* Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs, GAO-14-340SP: Published: Mar 31, 2014

| 4 |


Agile Acquisition

Small, Frequent Releases

Iteratively Developed

Review Working Software

Vice Extensive Docs

Responsive to Changes

Operations, Technology, Budgets

Active User Involvement

To Ensure High Ops Value

Small, dynamic, collaborative Gov’t/Industry teams focused on:

| 5 |


DoD Barriers to Agile Acquisition

Heavily regulated environment of acquisition policies and laws Bureaucratic, laborious, and slow processes Command-and-control governance structure and authorities

Agile Runs Counter to DoD’s Acquisition Environment

• Iterative releases vs big bang waterfall • Working software vs extensive docs • Respond to changes vs upfront plans

of budgets, requirements, designs

| 6 |


Programs Should Consider Agile When…

Requirements can be decomposed into small tasks

Ops environment supports small, frequent capability deliveries

Users can engage in development on CONOPS and feedback

Programs can use existing infrastructure, focus on applications

Industry has relevant domain expertise in Agile practices

Decision authority supports Agile and tailored processes

| 7 |


Release Length Based on Program, Ops, and Technical Risk

Structuring an Agile Program

Notional: 6 Month Release with 4-Week Sprints – Continual development, integration, and testing – Monthly demonstration of capabilities to users

Gov’t testers, certifiers, and users involved early and often – Minimizes work and surprises at the end of the release

Time Boxed Release

| 8 |


Potential Agile Structure Materiel

Development Decision

Materiel Solution Analysis Phase

Development Requirements RFP Release

Validation Decision

Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction Phase

Initial Operational Capability

Engineering and Manufacturing Development Phase

Full Operational Capability

Analyze trades of cost, performance risks and schedule.

Reduce risks, mature technologies, conduct design I requi rements trades, finalize requi rements and strategies.

Develop, build, and test system to verify all requirements are met and ready for production or deployment.

Analysis of Alternatives

1---=-..:.=:::..:..:.:=.=...;:..;:=---i Develop Technical Baseline

Develop Initial Ac uisition Strate

Competitive Prototypes

Mature Acquisition Strategy

Market Research

Estimate Costs

PDR

Contract Prep RFP

Plan Deployment Decision

Operations and Sustainment

Manage Contract(s)

Oeplo ment Oecisi n

MITRE

| 9 |


Agile Requirements Backlog

Sprint

An evolving, prioritized queue of requirements Integrates operational and technical requirements Actively managed with user inputs and reviews

Development team commits to scope of work for a sprint Sprint scope is locked, while release scope may change Sprint demos may identify new features or defects which

would be added to the release or program backlogs

1

Highest Priority Requirements

1

Program Backlog

Release Backlog

1

Highest Priority Requirements

Sprint Backlog

Develop, integrate, and test

Demo

User Feedback, Defects, and New Features

User

n

| 10 |


JCIDS IT Box Model

Streamlined requirements process for software >$15M JROC approves IS-ICD – delegates approvals of follow-on docs

– Follow-on docs tailored scope and content

Release 1 (6-12 Months)

Sprint 1 1 Month

Release Backlog

Sprint Backlog

IS ICD

RDP 1

CD 1

Sprint 2 1 Month

Sprint 3 1 Month

Sprint n 1 Month Fielding

Decision

RDP 2 ICD: Initial Capabilities Document RDP: Requirements Definition Package CD: Capability Drop

Sprint Backlog

Release Backlog

| 11 |


Consider a PEO, portfolio, or enterprise-level contract vehicle – Streamlined contracting processes result in faster awards, deliveries – Standardized, effective, and efficient contract management

Contract Vehicles

Multiple Award Contract Single IDIQ Contract GSA BPA

IDIQ contract awarded to multiple contractors who compete for work

via task orders

IDIQ contract awarded to single contractor with task orders to develop releases

Existing GSA Schedule contract (eg. Sched 70) w/releases developed

via call orders

| 12 |


Contracting for Agile – Service vs Product

Services (FAR Part 37) Product-based

Pay for the time and expertise of an Agile development contractor

Contract for a defined software delivery product

• Fixed priced • Cost-reimbursement term • T&M

• Firm Fixed Price • Cost-reimbursement completion

• Contractor is selected based on the strength of the development team

• Enables a teaming environment between the Government and contractor

• Appropriate when the Government wants to drive the development strategy

• Responsive to requirements changes • Close collaboration required to ensure an

integrated solution is delivered

• Contractor selected on technical solution • Requires upfront requirements definition

for contractor cost estimates • Difficult to hold contractor accountable for

delivery by directing Agile methods • Requirements changes requires contract

negotiation, ECPs, and/or mods • Diminishes flexibility and negotiation

power of the Government

Best option for Agile Very difficult for Agile

| 13 |


Services Contract Type

Contract Type Pros Cons

FFP Services

• Generally preferred contract type in DoD

• Easiest contract type to manage

• Requires deliverables for payment (e.g., monthly report) unless progress payments are authorized

• Contract amount cannot be changed without contract modification

• Cannot easily change labor mix and # of hours

Cost Reimbursement Term (Level of Effort)

• Flexibility to change labor mix and hours under contract ceiling

• Does not require a deliverable for payment

• Contract ceiling may be difficult to establish, which can affect upfront fee determination

• Requires closer Gov’t monitoring • Requires a certified cost accounting system

among other FAR requirements • Less incentivize for contractor to control

Time-and-Material (T&M) (Labor Hour)

• Flexibility to change labor mix and hours under contract ceiling

• Does not require a deliverable for payment

• Unpopular contract type across the Gov’t • Requires close Gov’t monitoring • Contractor is not incentivized to control costs

| 14 |


Summary

Using Agile development is an attractive option for IT programs – Regular capability deliveries – Responsive to changes in operations, tech, and budgets – Active user involvement and empowered teams Structure 6-12 month releases and tailor processes Dynamic and iterative requirements management Portfolio services contracting for industry partnership

Tailoring DoD acquisitions to enable Agile adoption, successful IT

For additional info, see MITRE Defense Agile Acquisition Guide

http://www.mitre.org/publications/technical-papers/defense-agile-acquisition-guide-tailoring-dod-it-acquisition-program

| 15 |


BACKUP SLIDES

| 16 |


Potential Agile Structure

FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19

PEO Reviews /) "-v ./

Program l M t .

1 Back~og Development RFP

a ene Validati~n Release Decision /', Developmen~ <)'"- /', /..,\ / .. , \ ) Decision , / \ ) '.. /

Solution Program Ana lysis Planning

Technology Development, Competitive Prototyping, Architecture Development and Evolution

Release Details Release c

I . 11.0

P annmg ·~

Design Review

Q

Program Backlog - Continual Grooming and Prioritization

Release Design, Development, Integration, Test, and Certification

Sprint 1 Sprint 2 Sprint 3 Sprint 4 Sprint n Deployment Decision

MITRE

| 17 |


Potential Contract Construct

Portfolio-level agile development contract – Quick execution of orders for each release (e.g., 6 months) – Single award for quick orders and consistent contractor – T&M for max flexibility (transition to FFP or CR after initial period) – Scope/requirements can adjust over time Services-based contract

– Contract for the services of the development team – Cost-boxed and time-boxed releases and sprints – Requirements in product backlog are flexible – Structure releases (e.g. 6 months) via separate task orders

| 18 |


Agile Overview

Leading software methodology – begin in 2001 Core Elements

– Small, frequent capability releases – Valuing working software over comprehensive documentation – Responding rapidly to changes in ops, technology, and budgets – Actively involving users throughout development Small, empowered, collaborative teams

– Follow disciplined process – Dynamic, tailored, and evolving – Continual process improvement

| 19 |


Five Prerequisites for Agile Acquisition

1. Small, frequent capability releases 2. Embrace change 3. Partnership: requirements, acquisition, contractor 4. Small, empowered, high-performing teams 5. Leverage a portfolio structure

addressing the barriers to agile development in dod · structuring an agile program ... agile...

Documents