large company practices. small company responsiveness. working … · 2017-05-18 · purpose ....

Large company practices. Small company responsiveness. Working for YOU.

BRITT BRAY DRC [email protected] 785-550-5573 1

mailto:[email protected]�

Purpose

3/13/2012

Feasibility and Affordability – Key factors for assessing requirements & proposed solutions

Constrained fiscal environment makes such scrutiny necessary to provide “best value” solutions to identified capability gaps.

Affordability and feasibility alone not sufficient. Assessing mission relevance and utility key to adequately weigh risks of unfilled or partially filled gaps.

This tutorial will describe why and how the Missions and Means Framework (MMF) may be applied as a methodology for assessing

mission relevance of requirements and proposed solutions.

Outline

Background ► Requirements Process ► Relationship of T&E ► Importance of Mission – Task Analysis to T&E MMF Application to Determine Mission Relevance Discussion

3/13/2012

Requirements Determination - JCIDS Overview

3/13/2012

(2) Capability requirements and capability gaps identified through CBAs and other studies are traceable to an organization’s assigned roles and missions, and, to the greatest extent possible, described in terms of tasks, standards, and conditions in accordance with references bb and cc. (UJTL)

Army Application of JCIDS

* From TRADOC Reg. 71-20

Feasible? Affordable? Relevant to Mission?

Where Does T&E Traditionally Fit?

3/13/2012

* From TRADOC Reg. 71-20

7

Some T&E Challenges

A. How do you Measure Contribution of Individual Parts to Effectiveness of the Whole?

B. How do you Measure Contribution of Combinations of Parts to Effectiveness of the Whole?

C. How do you Measure Contribution of Non-Lethal Capabilities to Mission Accomplishment/Effectiveness?

D. How do you Tie in Planning for and Results of Distributed Test Events to a Single Integrated T&E Plan?

E. How do you Measure Contribution of Human in the Loop and HSI to Mission Accomplishment/Effectiveness?

8

TASK

MISSION

OPERATION

MISSION REQUIREMENTS

TASK PERFORMANCE

We measure Mission Accomplishment – Are we getting the job done (MOEs)

We measure Task Performance – Task to Operation (Small to Big)

– We want to measure System Performance – Against System Requirements AND – Against Task Requirements

Mission – Task Analysis Offers A Proven Approach

Evolution of the Mission

28 Jun 06 9

SN Level Task

ST Level Task Spting SN Task

OP Level Task Spting ST

ART Mission Task Spting OP

ART System Task Spting Collective Task

ART Collective (SoS) Task Spting Mission Task

- Tasks derived from Authoritative Task Lists -Common, doctrinally based language provides clarity – link to doctrine & TTPs.

- Linked to JCAs and FOCs.

Linking to the Higher Level Mission

3/13/2012

SN Level Task

ST Level Task Spting SN Task

OP Level Task Spting ST

ART Mission Task Spting OP

TASK

OPERATION

MISSION

Linking Mission – Task Analysis to System

23 June 06 personnel

leadership

organization

T1 T1 T1 T1 T1 Tm

component

subsystem

operational

tactical

strategic theater

platform/ system of systems

(materiel)

strategic national

Cn Cn Cn Cn Is this a mission capability package

that meets the mission capability requirement?

training

doctrine

DOTMLPF Solution Operational

Requirement

12

AEC’s MBT&E Framework Implements Mission - Task

Mission Capabilities (Higher Commander ‘s mission and tasks)

Desired Effect Task

SoS Task Capabilities (Mission and tasks of unit employing the system)

Desired Effect Task

Materiel SoS Performance

Desired Effect Attribute

MISSION PLANNING

ENABLES

SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

ENABLES

MISSION AND SYSTEM

Measures Of

Effectiveness

Measures Of

Performance

EVALUATED BY TESTED BY

Contractor Testing

Developmental

Testing

Live Fire Testing

Operational

Testing

Models & Simulations

Demonstrated Certifications

Missions and Means Framework – Conceptual Model

3 Mar 05 13

6. Context, Environment (Military, Civil, Physical, etc.)

7. OWNFOR Why = Purpose, Mission

5. Index: Location & Time

O1,2 O1,2 O2,3

O3,4 O3,4

BLUFOR OPFOR

7. OPFOR Why = Purpose, Mission

O2,3

O4,1 O4,1

2. Components, Forces

1. Interactions, Effects

3. Functions, Services

7. Mission

4. Tasks, Operations



11 Fundamental Elements: 7 levels, 4 operators

7. Mission


Employment

Planning

Mission Relevance

3 Mar 05 14

6. Context, Environment (Military, Civil, Physical, etc.)

7. OWNFOR Why = Purpose, Mission

5. Index: Location & Time

O1,2 O1,2 O2,3

O3,4 O3,4

BLUFOR OPFOR

7. OPFOR Why = Purpose, Mission

O2,3

O4,1 O4,1




7. Mission



3. Functions, Capabilities

11 Fundamental Elements: 7 levels, 4 operators

7. Mission


Employment

Planning

-Tasks, Conditions, Standards Determined From Analysis of Mission and Operational Context.

-Mission and Operational Context Provided by Concepts

-Tasks, Conditions, Standards Should be Linked to Mission

- UJTL and Service Tasks Linked to JCAs and FOCs

-Interactions Correlate to Test Events and TOEL Events.

- Events Should Result in Task Execution and Assessment.

- Tasks Should be Performed or Supported by System/SoS Under Test.

-System and/or System of Systems under test with requirements as described in CDD, CPD, ICD, etc.

- Requirements Stated as Tasks, Conditions, Standards Initially

- Vertical and Horizontal Relationship to Service and Joint Force Should be Understood and Specified

- Categories of Functions and Capabilities Required to Enable Tasks and Operations (Determined by User Rep)

- Can be Mapped to JCAs (Tier 1-7) and Army Force Operating Capabilities (FOCs)

- JCAs and FOCs Mapped to Concepts

- Concepts Mapped to Higher Level Planning Guidance

So how are Tasks executed? [1/4]

Tasks

interactions

initiate

which change



2. Personnel, Units Components, Systems


O2,3

O4,1 O3,4

O1,2

components

* Used With Permission from Dr. Paul Deitz, AMSAA

Interplatform Component Linkage 2. Personnel, Units

Components, Systems

Component #2

Component #1

Component #8

Component #3

Component #7

Component #4

Component #6

Component #5

Platform assessment based on individual task performance! individual task performance! * Used With Permission from Dr.

Paul Deitz, AMSAA

Intraplatform Linkage: Key SoS Construct 2. Personnel, Units

Components, Systems

Platform #2

Platform #1

Platform #8

Platform #3

Platform #7

Platform #4

Platform #6

Platform #5

SoS assessment based on collective task performance! collective task performance! * Used With Permission from Dr.

Paul Deitz, AMSAA

Tasks

[w structure]

interactions

initiate

which change which change

capabilities

which execute



2. Personnel, Units Components, Systems


O2,3

O4,1 O3,4

O1,2

components

So how are Tasks executed? [4/4]


A “Lego” Collection of Mission/Performance Elements

• Ballistic Effects • Jamming • Damage Repair • Chemical • Resupply • Repair • Laser Damage • Sleep

• Directed Energy • Nuclear • Physics of Failure • Logistics Burdens • Reliability • Fair Wear & Tear • Fatigue

• Heat Stress • . . . • . . .

≈ 2200 Universal Joint Tasks • ≈ 350 Condition Descriptors • ≈ 4 Standards per Task ≈ 680 Army Universal Tasks

• ≈ 350 Condition Descriptors • ≈ 4 Standards per Task

Unlimited geometric & material configurations/structures

Capabilities described in task-

compatible metrics

Degraded States Mapping Methodology well

established

Ability to Mix & Match Levels & Operators

O3,4

● ● ●

4. Tasks, Operations 4. Tasks, Operations

4. Tasks, Operations 4. Tasks, Operations

O4,1 ●

●

●

1. Interactions, Effects 1. Interactions,

Effects 1. Interactions, Effects 1. Interactions,

Effects

O2,3

●

●

●

3. Functions, Services 3. Functions,

Services 3. Functions, Services 3. Functions,

Services

O1,2

●

●

●

2. Personnel, Units Components, Systems 2. Personnel, Units

Components, Systems 2. Personnel, Units Components, Systems 2. Personnel, Units

Components, Systems


Sequence of Task Cycles Forms TOEL

• Missions are composed of task sequences

• Following task initiation, an event cycle occurs

• As a result, material, capability, and utility changes may follow

• The “lego” elements can be combined endlessly with great extensibility

• All communities of interest can focus on the specific elements with clarity, define sharing or exclusivity with others, understand precedence, dependencies, . . .

Task #1

●

●

●

Task #2 Task #3 Task #n TIME TIME

Dev Test

Requirements Op Test

Research

Integrated OR/SA

Human Dimension

Effectiveness Analysis

Material Analysis

● ● ●

● ● ●

Are the Venn data sets or or ?

Task #1

●

●

●

Task #2 Task #3 Task #n

Linkage to Higher Level

Missions/Concepts

4. Tasks

1. Interactions

2. Components

3. Capabilities

+ Context Capabilities matched to Tasks

Capabilities described in task-

compatible metrics

MMF Approach Provides Way to Determine Requirement

Relevance to Mission AND Assess Risks (in Operational Terms) if Not

Met

Material/People Interactions

Geometry/Materiel Specifications

MMF Links Task Definition to Task Execution Share Task Execution methods, measures &

data structures across the Community • Ballistic Effects

• Jamming • Damage Repair • Chemical • Resupply • Repair • Laser Damage • Sleep

• Directed Energy • Nuclear • Physics of Failure • Logistics Burdens • Reliability • Fair Wear & Tear • Fatigue

• Heat Stress • . . . • . . .

QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION

3/13/2012

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR QUESTIONS PLEASE CONTACT:

BRITT BRAY Dynamics Research Corporation

(785) 550-5573 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]�

Back Up

Rolling up from platform tasks to SoS Mission Status

3 Mar 05 24

Mission status goes red Cannot Accomplish

Can resources or COA adjust?

Is TC acceptable risk?

Can meet commander’s intent?

Mission status goes amber.

Mission status goes green.

No

Yes

No

No

Yes Yes

If all essential collective tasks are green…

If some essential collective task TC is red…

TC goes red.

Is TP red? Is TP critical to TC?

Is TP amber?

Is TP critical to TC?

TC goes amber.

TC goes green.

Example: Platform task TP = Disseminate COP Collective task TC = Manage tactical information

Is platform degraded and can’t satisfy a MOP for TP ?

Is platform degraded? (can satisfy MOP for TP )

No

Yes Yes No No

No

Yes

Yes

Platform tasks to collective tasks

SoS solution

Executing the Battle MCS Co A phase 3 urban assault

3 Mar 05 25

MISSION: Attack north on AXIS Maple and seize OBJ APPLE NLT 0600 hrs. Establish attack by fire positions on OBJ APPLE and engage enemy forces already in or entering EA DUNK IOT block enemy forces from moving north to support rebel leadership vic Westpoint or support enemy forces defending in and around Louisville.

ENDSTATE: Enemy forces vicinity of Knox remain south of EA DUNK until friendly operations vicinity of Westpoint are completed.

Enemy Artillery Fire

K K

3 Mar 05 26

= Cannot perform task = Degraded task = Healthy task

Illustrating the roll up to system/mission health

x1

x1

x1

x1

2. Effect on C2V Tasks

1. C2V Loss of

digital communications

3. Effect on MCS Company Collective Task

4. Effect on MCS A Mission

How it Works

Determine and document mission requirements – Converting to ATL Tasks

3/13/2012

How it Works cont.

Determine and document mission requirements – Conditions

3/13/2012

How it Works cont.

Determine and document mission requirements – Standards

3/13/2012

A.K.A. Measures of Performance and Measures of Effectiveness

Mission Task Report in TEO Format

3/13/2012

How it Works cont.

Record and maintain task execution results

3/13/2012

How it Works cont.

Record and maintain task assessment results

3/13/2012

large company practices. small company responsiveness. working … · 2017-05-18 · purpose ....

Documents