Owning the Technical Baseline for Acquisition Programs in the U.S. Air Force A Workshop Report (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 Workshop Participant Observations
2 Workshop Participant Observations
Pages 9-24
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 9... ...
He noted that this program was an example of doing things right. Bolton expressed his opinion that the implementation of the development planning approach, similar to the way things were done back in the Vanguard days, along with the pre-milestone B activities that included technical baseline ownership and activities, are well under way, ensuring that the "right people" appear to be in place along with the right resources (processes, tools, procedures, and techniques)
|
From page 10... ...
Beyond a robust design, the contracting effort will focus on clearly defined technical baselines and priced production lots to balance both near-term needs as well as the long-term sustainment of the LRSO cruise missile. that every successful program presented at the workshop had a program office that had a deep technical insight into the operational environment in which the system would be used.
|
From page 11... ...
acquisition program, commonly known as T-X, is one of the Air Force's top acquisition priorities. By 2031, greater than 60 percent of the Combat Air Force fleet will be "5th generation." APT aircraft and associated ground-based training systems, mission planning systems, and courseware will replace the aging 3rd-generation T-38 Talon fleet, thereby providing an essentially higher-quality training experience for our Airman.
|
From page 12... ...
Terry Jaggers, former chief engineer of the Air Force and former deputy chief engineer of the Department of Defense (DoD) , asserted that the Air Force owns the technical baseline of all programs before contract award, at which time it "conscientiously" keeps or gives up [some or all]
|
From page 13... ...
Furthermore, he believes that this should be a consistent status item at all major program reviews. A recurring topic was the view, expressed by several workshop participants (Terry Jaggers, Trey bering, O Richard Roca)
|
From page 14... ...
, university affiliated research centers, and professional service contractors. Jon Ogg and Sue Payton believe the Air Force seems to be conflicted in its position on the value of a strong and effective engineering and technical workforce, for it is not clear that there is a unified position across Air Force program offices as to the need, role, or value of an organic engineering workforce.
|
From page 15... ...
, that it is essential that senior Air Force leadership make it clear to all functional leaders supporting acquisition that the Air Force highly values technically trained and competent acquisition and engineering personnel.
|
From page 16... ...
As described by Griffin, "They are art critics, not artists." Payton then asked, "Who has the responsibility for growing the competence of the Air Force engineering workforce? " She stated that she has observed that the technical competence of the Air Force acquisition workforce has deteriorated dramatically because external organizations such as HAF/A1, SAF/AA, and SAF/FM have usurped the authority from SAF/AQ to manage acquisition personnel assignments, resources, and promotions.
|
From page 17... ...
To support the discussion, they provided handouts that addressed a notion for organizing the major players in Defense acquisition, along with comments provided by the current program offices. Ogg believes the Air Force leadership must realize that it is going to be an uphill battle to capture, retain, and train organic technical talent within the acquisition workforce.
|
From page 18... ...
The Air Force appears to have lost the flexibility to move engineers where they are needed due to the UMD paperwork approval requirement, observed Kyle. According to Ogg, if the Air Force leadership values technical competence and capability for acquisition success, they have it within their means to invest in the future workforce by providing enablers to acquiring, training, and retaining high-caliber technical talent.
|
From page 19... ...
Sue Payton agreed with Ogg's suggestions and added that it is fundamental to acquisition program success and to intellectually owning the technical baseline to have the autonomy to manage the very engineering workforce needed for the job. She noted that while the acquisition chain is waiting 6 months or more for civil service personnel to be hired and reassigned, it is losing crucially needed engineering talent to other components within the DoD or industry who can direct hire, despite appeals of patriotism, stability, and education, among other factors, inherent to government work.
|
From page 20... ...
This includes hiring top-rung engineers from academia or industry, funding advanced education and training, and having mentors and coaches guide careers through increasingly more important roles and responsibilities and ensuring that engineers gain the necessary core competencies to fulfill the needs of PEOs and PMs charged with executing programs. While eligibility for tuition "assistance" at local colleges and universities may be adequate, Payton argued, in many instances it is not sufficient to maintain and acquire the level of technical engineering skills urgently needed, as stated by the Secretary and Chief in their recently released Air Force Engineering Enterprise Strategic Plan 2014-2024, "to continue to lead the world in the development of those cutting-edge weapon systems vital to the security of our nation and its allies."5 Payton believes Air Force senior leadership must step forward with adequate funding to support their stated goals and priorities.
|
From page 21... ...
Another major concern voiced by Kyle is that the LPTA contracts do not have the correct skills and experience criteria that allow contractors to provide the needed high-quality and specific technical resources. It appeared that some of the existing LPTA contracts were written to accommodate a larger group of contract awardees, including small businesses, and save money through artificially suppressed labor rates versus ensuring the ability to quickly and efficiently hire proficient, competent technical contractor resources.
|
From page 22... ...
Kyle suggested that if the contracting officer and PM accept the Federal Acquisition Regulation "acquisition team" approach, then the contracting officer also has an inherent responsibility to ensure program success. A recurring topic was the view, articulated by two participants (Terry Jaggers, Gary Kyle)
|
From page 23... ...
A variety of standard engineering tools and software should be bought at the enterprise level and then, Payton recommended, pushed out to all the program offices. Sue Payton expanded on this a bit more by suggesting that while the Air Worthiness engineering process is well defined, there is not a robust, standard collection of engineering processes that other programs follow.
|
From page 24... ...
Several participants noted that many presentations cited the need for barriers to be lifted in the financial management community (using 3600 funding to resource an increase in the number and improve the technical capabilities of the acquisition workforce) , contracting community (providing access to higher technical talent subject-matter experts for high-quality engineering services support, for example)
|
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.