12.4 DBS-specific Criteria

DEFENSE ACQUISITION GUIDEBOOK
Chapter 12 - Defense Business System Definition and Acquisition Business Capability Lifecycle (BCL)

12.4. DBS-specific Criteria

12.4.1. Time-Limited Development

12.4.2. BCL Governance

12.4.3. Roles and Responsibilities

12.4. DBS-specific Criteria

12.4.1. Time-Limited Development

The reasons for Time-Limited Phases in the Business Capability Lifecycle (BCL) are that:

• Technical capabilities and software development are strongly related to Moore's law, roughly doubling in ability every 18 months (or less); and
• User requirements almost always change as soon as a capability is fielded - as more users take advantage of the solution, new ideas for enhancement or additional capability tend to increase.

Unlike a traditional "waterfall" acquisition, where requirements and technologies can be defined much earlier in the acquisition process, information technology (IT) acquisitions (specifically in this chapter, defense business systems (DBS)) are characterized by fluid requirements and rapidly changing technology.

The key to successfully fielding IT is to quickly get capability into the hands of users. Too often, users and developers spend years trying to specify requirements in this dynamic environment and never field any capability. Instead, the functional stakeholders should define the business outcomes they want to achieve, how they are going to measure achievement, and acknowledge that things will change.

The success of the BCL approach depends on end-users' prioritization of requirements, the subsequent scoping of each increment, and focusing on fielding useable capability as rapidly as possible. The key is to prioritize requirements and divide them into small, useful capabilities by performing technology trades against cost and requirements to achieve delivery within Milestone Decision Authority (MDA)-approved timelines.

Time-limiting considerations, by phase, are as follows:

• Business Capability Definition (BCD) Phase. Although this phase is not time limited, it is critical to the success of all the other phases; it defines the problem to be solved and frames the scope of the acquisition. In this Phase, the Functional Sponsor (representing the needs of the end user) defines:
  • What the need / gap / problem is (the Problem Statement);
  • How they will know when the problem is fixed (the high-level outcome(s)); and,
  • How they are going to measure progress towards those outcomes.

Although there are other relevant tasks to be accomplished (see a complete discussion of the Business Capability Definition (BCD) Phase in Section 12.1, Business Capability Definition (BCD) Phase), these have the highest impact on time-limited development (if these are not adequately articulated and agreed to by the Functional Sponsor, it will be unclear what constitutes success and will likely be revisited / redefined).

• Investment Management (IM) Phase. The time-limit for the IM Phase is 12 months or less. At the start of this Phase, the optimal "To-Be" Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership and education, Personnel, Facilities, and Policy (DOTMLPF-P) process should have already been selected, though it is not yet complete. A materiel need is identified, but the specific solution to fulfill it is undefined. Using the Problem Statement, an Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) is conducted to select the best materiel approach to solve the problem, or a scoped portion of the problem (i.e., a single problem statement could spawn multiple programs.) Keys for success within the time-limitation are:
  • Define the approach to the materiel solution (e.g., an ERP or Web 2.0 technologies). Ensure assumptions, scope, boundaries and constraints are well-articulated (you may not be able to solve the entire problem with the selected technical solution today. Tomorrow brings new technologies, new versions of more-capable software, and updated requirements.)
  • Understanding assumptions, scope, boundaries and constraints. Determine which are statutory and which are "artificial" (an AoA is mandatory, but a subordinate 75-day sub-process may be artificial.) Agreements made with Functional Sponsor(s) and/or the MDA can mitigate artificial constraints.
  • Keep planning at the strategic level. Do not over-plan, because in this environment the plan is going to change. At this stage, the user's desired outcomes will be at a very high level. (i.e., "full auditability"). There is no way to address all of the issues that are encountered this early in the process and, even so, requirements would change before completing the associated plans. The result would be an endless do-loop of changing your plans to fulfill new requirements. A key to success is to be able to clearly articulate the approach to solving the problem using the preferred materiel solution (and over-time, the preferred materiel solution is going to change.).
• Prototyping Phase. BCL mandates completion of Prototyping within 12 months or less of contract/option award. This time-limit also to each subsequent Increment (after Authorization to Proceed (ATP) is granted) as well. The key to completing Prototyping within 12 months is to limit the scope of activities to those absolutely necessary, such as the following:
  • It is critical to obtain the preferred materiel solution as rapidly as possible.
  • Ensure the Functional Sponsor has prioritized requirements (business outcomes) before the MS A decision. Expect this prioritized list to be more requirements than can be fulfilled in 18 months. Part of this phase's activities is scoping the requirements for the Increment to achieve a useful capability that can be delivered in less than 18 months. Multiple prototype or pilot demonstrations may be necessary to reach agreement on an acceptable, operationally useful, and affordable increment of capability that can be delivered within this timeframe.
  • Significant emphasis must be placed on leveraging enterprise services and existing infrastructures. These are known entities and will significantly reduce engineering development and testing risks in the next phase.
  • Develop a reasonable plan to build and deploy. Also, set user expectations. The objective is not to maximize the number of requirements that can be incorporated into an 18 month schedule; rather it is to get the useful capabilities out to the user as rapidly as possible. When the program manager and the Functional Sponsor have agreed which requirements are going to be satisfied and the technologies to be used for the Increment, the Business Case must be updated and the Functional Sponsor must provide a description of what will constitute IOC.
• Engineering Development (ED) and Limited Fielding Phases. After the Engineering Development Phase contract is awarded (post-MS B) the a MAIS DBS program has 18 months to obtain a Full Deployment Decision (FDD) to include achieving Initial Operating Capability (IOC). This should be the focus of all of the program's efforts. When achieving IOC appears imminent, focus can be shifted to the next goal(s) - the Full-Deployment Decision (FDD) and possibly the next increment.
• Full Deployment Phase and O&S. These phases are not time-limited.

The timelines for the phases of BCL must be taken into consideration during program planning, scoping, and Business Case development. Violations of these timelines require re-validation of the Business Case by the Investment Review Board (IRB) (and the MDA, as required), and can potentially slow down the delivery of capability to the user. Table 12.4.1.T1 outlines BCL timelines.

Table 12.4.1.T1 - BCL Timelines

• *IOC is a Functional Sponsor written declaration; though the MDA will generally not grant a MS A if it is not clear that IOC is achievable within 5 years of MS A.
• **Authority to Proceed (ATP) is for follow-on increments. There is one MS A for the overall program, but there may be multiple ATPs (if there are multiple increments). ATP will "kick off" an increment.
• ***If activities can be conducted in time periods much less than the maximum time allotted, reflecting this in schedules and plans promotes visibility, and rapid capability delivery.

12.4.2. BCL Governance

The Business Capability Lifecycle (BCL) aligns defense business system (DBS) requirements, investment, and acquisition processes into a single, tiered integrated decision-making framework that provides oversight commensurate with program complexity and risk. The Functional Sponsor is a key focal point at the Component level in the earliest stages of the capability and partners with the program manager (PM) throughout the process as the capability matures. This integrated model of governance is depicted in Figure 12.4.2.F1:

Figure 12.4.2.F1 - Governance

Each Investment Review Board (IRB) assesses investments in its portfolio relative to their functional needs, as well as the impact on end-to-end business process improvements as guided by the Business Enterprise Architecture (BEA), articulated in the DoD Enterprise Transition Plan (ETP), the DoD Strategic Management Plan (SMP), and/or described in Component architectures and transition plans. These products provide both the end-state and the roadmap to deliver more robust business capabilities.

For MAIS, the IRBs review requirement changes and technical configuration changes during the development process that have the potential to result in cost and schedule impacts to the program. Such changes will generally be disapproved or deferred to future increments and will not be approved unless funds are identified and schedule impacts mitigated.

The Defense Business Systems Management Committee (DBSMC) guides the Department in developing and implementing integrated business functions and capabilities. The DBSMC is the final approval authority for all certification decisions.

The MDA is responsible for making DBS acquisition decisions and relies on the IRB's advice in its role as OIPT and information provided by the Component to include: functional requirements; the Business Case; appropriate Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) and BEA compliance (as determined by the Pre-Certifying Authority (PCA));and a DBSMC-approved investment decision.

12.4.3. Roles and Responsibilities

DoD officials and organizations have specific investment and acquisition-related roles and responsibilities throughout the Business Capability Lifecycle (BCL), as outlined in Table 12.4.3.T1. and T2.

Table 12.4.3.T1 - DoD Component-Level Roles and Responsibilities

Table 12.4.3.T2 -OSD-Level Roles and Responsibilities

Top of page