Chapter 2 Systems Engineering Management in DoD Acquisition

11
CHAPTER 2
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
MANAGEMENT IN
DOD ACQUISITION
establish the broad responsibilities and ground
rules to be followed in funding and acquiring major
assets. The departments of the executive branch of
government are then expected to draft their own
guidance consistent with the guidelines estab-
lished. The principal guidance for defense system
acquisitions is the DoD 5000 series of directives
and regulations. These documents reflect the
actions required of DoD acquisition managers to:
Translate operational needs into stable,
affordable programs,
Acquire quality products, and
Organize for efficiency and effectiveness.
2.2 RECENT CHANGES
The DoD 5000 series documents were revised in
2000 to make the process more flexible, enabling
the delivery of advanced technology to warfighters
more rapidly and at reduced total ownership cost.
The new process encourages multiple entry points,
depending on the maturity of the fundamental tech-
nologies involved, and the use of evolutionary meth-
ods to define and develop systems. This encourages
a tailored approach to acquisition and engineering
management, but it does not alter the basic logic
of the underlying systems engineering process.
2.3 ACQUISITION LIFE CYCLE
The revised acquisition process for major defense
systems is shown in Figure 2-1. The process is
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The DoD acquisition process has its foundation in
federal policy and public law. The development,
acquisition, and operation of military systems is
governed by a multitude of public laws, formal
DoD directives, instructions and manuals, numer-
ous Service and Component regulations, and many
inter-service and international agreements.
Managing the development and fielding of mili-
tary systems requires three basic activities: tech-
nical management, business management, and con-
tract management. As described in this book,
systems engineering management is the technical
management component of DoD acquisition
management.
The acquisition process runs parallel to the require-
ments generation process and the budgeting pro-
cess (Planning, Programming, and Budgeting Sys-
tem.) User requirements tend to be event driven
by threat. The budgeting process is date driven by
constraints of the Congressional calendar. Systems
Engineering Management bridges these processes
and must resolve the dichotomy of event driven
needs, event driven technology development, and
a calendar driven budget.
Direction and Guidance
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
provides top-level guidance for planning, budget-
ing, and acquisition in OMB Circular A-11, Part
3, and the Supplemental Capital Programming
Guide: Planning, Budgeting, and Acquisition of
Capital Assets, July 1997. These documents
Systems Engineering Fundamentals Chapter 2
12
Figure 2-1. Revised DoD 5000 Acquisition Process
defined by a series of phases during which tech-
nology is defined and matured into viable concepts,
which are subsequently developed and readied for
production, after which the systems produced are
supported in the field.
The process allows for a given system to enter the
process at any of the development phases. For ex-
ample, a system using unproven technology would
enter at the beginning stages of the process and
would proceed through a lengthy period of tech-
nology maturation, while a system based on ma-
ture and proven technologies might enter directly
into engineering development or, conceivably, even
production. The process itself (Figure 2-1) includes
four phases of development. The first, Concept
and Technology Development, is intended to ex-
plore alternative concepts based on assessments
of operational needs, technology readiness, risk,
and affordability. Entry into this phase does not
imply that DoD has committed to a new acquisi-
tion program; rather, it is the initiation of a pro-
cess to determine whether or not a need (typically
described in a Mission Need Statement (MNS))
can be met at reasonable levels of technical risk
and at affordable costs. The decision to enter into
the Concept and Technology Development phase
is made formally at the Milestone A forum.
The Concept and Technology Development
phase begins with concept exploration. During this
stage, concept studies are undertaken to define al-
ternative concepts and to provide information about
capability and risk that would permit an objective
comparison of competing concepts. A decision
review is held after completion of the concept ex-
ploration activities. The purpose of this review is
to determine whether further technology develop-
ment is required, or whether the system is ready to
enter into system acquisition. If the key technolo-
gies involved are reasonably mature and have al-
ready been demonstrated, the Milestone Decision
Authority (MDA) may agree to allow the system
to proceed into system acquisition; if not, the sys-
tem may be directed into a component advanced
development stage. (See Supplement A to this
chapter for a definition of Technology Readiness
levels.) During this stage, system architecture defi-
nition will continue and key technologies will be
demonstrated in order to ensure that technical and
cost risks are understood and are at acceptable lev-
els prior to entering acquisition. In any event, the
Milestones
Process entry at
Milestones A, B, or C
(or within phases)
Program outyear funding
when it makes sense, but
no later than Milestone B
Concept and
Technology
Development
System
Development and
Demonstration
Production
and
Deployment
Sustainment
and
Disposal
Pre-Systems
Acquisition
Systems Acquisition
(Engineering Development, Demonstration,
LRIP and Production)
Sustainment
and
Maintenance
Relationship to Requirements Process
MNS
ORD
A B C IOC
Single Step or
Evolution
to Full Capacity
All validated by JROC
Chapter 2 Systems Engineering Management in DoD Acquisition
13
Concept and Technology Development phase ends
with a defined system architecture supported by
technologies that are at acceptable levels of matu-
rity to justify entry into system acquisition.
Formal system acquisition begins with a Milestone
B decision. The decision is based on an integrated
assessment of technology maturity, user require-
ments, and funding. A successful Milestone B is
followed by the System Development and Dem-
onstration phase. This phase could be entered di-
rectly as a result of a technological opportunity
and urgent user need, as well as having come
through concept and technology development. The
System Development and Demonstration phase
consists of two stages of development, system
integration and system demonstration. Depending
upon the maturity level of the system, it could enter
at either stage, or the stages could be combined.
This is the phase during which the technologies,
components and subsystems defined earlier are first
integrated at the system level, and then demon-
strated and tested. If the system has never been
integrated into a complete system, it will enter this
phase at the system integration stage. When sub-
systems have been integrated, prototypes demon-
strated, and risks are considered acceptable, the
program will normally enter the system demon-
stration stage following an interim review by the
MDA to ensure readiness. The system demonstra-
tion stage is intended to demonstrate that the system
has operational utility consistent with the opera-
tional requirements. Engineering demonstration
models are developed and system level develop-
ment testing and operational assessments are per-
formed to ensure that the system performs as
required. These demonstrations are to be conducted
in environments that represent the eventual opera-
tional environments intended. Once a system has
been demonstrated in an operationally relevant
environment, it may enter the Production and
Deployment phase.
The Production and Deployment phase consists
of two stages: production readiness and low rate
initial production (LRIP), and rate production
and deployment. The decision forum for entry into
this phase is the Milestone C event. Again, the
fundamental issue as to where a program enters
the process is a function of technology maturity,
so the possibility exists that a system could enter
directly into this phase if it were sufficiently ma-
ture, for example, a commercial product to be pro-
duced for defense applications. However the entry
is madedirectly or through the maturation pro-
cess described, the production readiness and LRIP
stage is where initial operational test, live fire test,
and low rate initial production are conducted. Upon
completion of the LRIP stage and following a
favorable Beyond LRIP test report, the system enters
the rate production and deployment stage during
which the item is produced and deployed to the
user. As the system is produced and deployed, the
final phase, Sustainment and Disposal, begins.
The last, and longest, phase is the Sustainment
and Disposal phase of the program. During this
phase all necessary activities are accomplished to
maintain and sustain the system in the field in the
most cost-effective manner possible. The scope of
activities is broad and includes everything from
maintenance and supply to safety, health, and en-
vironmental management. This period may also
include transition from contractor to organic sup-
port, if appropriate. During this phase, modifica-
tions and product improvements are usually imple-
mented to update and maintain the required levels
of operational capability as technologies and threat
systems evolve. At the end of the system service
life it is disposed of in accordance with applicable
classified and environmental laws, regulations, and
directives. Disposal activities also include recy-
cling, material recovery, salvage of reutilization,
and disposal of by-products from development and
production.
The key to this model of the acquisition process is
that programs have the flexibility to enter at any
of the first three phases described. The decision as
to where the program should enter the process is
primarily a function of user needs and technology
maturity. The MDA makes the decision for the
program in question. Program managers are
encouraged to work with their users to develop evo-
lutionary acquisition strategies that will permit
deliveries of usable capabilities in as short a time-
frame as possible, with improvements and en-
hancements added as needed through continuing
Systems Engineering Fundamentals Chapter 2
14
definition of requirements and development activi-
ties to support the evolving needs.
2.4 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
IN ACQUISITION
As required by DoD 5000.2-R, the systems
engineering process shall:
1. Transform operational needs and requirements
into an integrated system design solution
through concurrent consideration of all life-
cycle needs (i.e., development, manufacturing,
test and evaluation, verification, deployment,
operations, support, training and disposal).
2. Ensure the compatibility, interoperability and
integration of all functional and physical inter-
faces and ensure that system definition and
design reflect the requirements for all system
elements: hardware, software, facilities, people,
and data; and
3. Characterize and manage technical risks.
4. Apply scientific and engineering principles to
identify security vulnerabilities and to minimize
or contain associated information assurance and
force protection risks.
These objectives are accomplished with use of the
management concepts and techniques described in
the chapters which follow in this book. The appli-
cation of systems engineering management coin-
cides with acquisition phasing. In order to support
milestone decisions, major technical reviews are
conducted to evaluate system design maturity.
Concept and Technology Development
The Concept and Technology Development phase
consists of two pre-acquisition stages of develop-
ment. The first, Concept Exploration, is repre-
sented in Figure 2-2. The exploration of concepts
is usually accomplished through multiple short-
term studies. Development of these studies is
Figure 2-2. Concept and Technology Development (Concept Exploration Stage)
Analysis of Alternatives
Operational Analysis
R&D Activities
Technology Opportunity
Assessments and Analysis
Market Research
Business Process
Reengineering
System Engineering Process
(System Architecting)
MNS
Technology
Opportunity
Assessments
MS A
Alternative Concepts Defined
Key Requirements Defined
Key Cost, Schedule, Performance
Objectives Established
ORD Development
Preferred Concepts
Decision
Review
Technical Review
Chapter 2 Systems Engineering Management in DoD Acquisition
15
Figure 2-3. Concept and Technology Development
(Component Advanced Development Stage)
expected to employ various techniques including
the systems engineering process that translates
inputs into viable concept architectures whose
functionality can be traced to the requirements. In
addition, market surveys, Business Process Reengi-
neering activities, operational analysis, and trade
studies support the process.
The primary inputs to these activities include
requirements, in form of the MNS, assessments of
technology opportunities and status, and the out-
puts from any efforts undertaken to explore poten-
tial solutions. When the contractor studies are
complete, a specific concept to be pursued is
selected based on a integrated assessment of tech-
nical performance; technical, schedule and cost
risk; as well as other relevant factors. A decision
review is then held to evaluate the concept recom-
mended and the state of technology upon which
the concept depends. The MDA then makes a
decision as to whether the concept development
work needs to be extended or redirected, or whether
the technology maturity is such that the program
can proceed directly to either Mile-stone B (System
Development and Demonstration) or Milestone C
(Production and Deployment).
If the details of the concept require definition,
i.e., the system has yet to be designed and demon-
strated previously, or the system appears to be
based on technologies that hold significant risk,
then it is likely that the system will proceed to the
second stage of the Concept and Technology
Development phase. This stage, Component
Advanced Development, is represented in Figure
2-3. This is also a pre-acquisition stage of devel-
opment and is usually characterized by extensive
involvement of the DoD Science and Technology
(S&T) community. The fundamental objectives of
this stage of development are to define a system-
level architecture and to accomplish risk-reduction
activities as required to establish confidence that
the building blocks of the system are sufficiently
well-defined, tested and demonstrated to provide
confidence that, when integrated into higher level
assemblies and subsystems, they will perform
reliably.
Development of a system-level architecture entails
continuing refinement of system level requirements
based on comparative analyses of the system con-
cepts under consideration. It also requires that
consideration be given to the role that the system
Continued Concept Exploration
Activities As Appropriate
Advanced Concept Technology
Demonstration
Systems Engineering Process
(System Architecture Developed)
System Architecture
Developed
Component Technology
Demonstrated
ORD Development
MS B
Concept
Decision
Review
Systems Engineering Fundamentals Chapter 2
16
will play in the system of systems of which it will
be a part. System level interfaces must be estab-
lished. Communications and interoperability re-
quirements must be established, data flows defined,
and operational concepts refined. Top level plan-
ning should also address the strategies that will be
employed to maintain the supportability and
affordability of the system over its life cycle
including the use of common interface standards
and open systems architectures. Important design
requirements such as interoperability, open sys-
tems, and the use of commercial components
should also be addressed during this stage of the
program.
Risk reduction activities such as modeling and
simulation, component testing, bench testing, and
man-in-the-loop testing are emphasized as deci-
sions are made regarding the various technologies
that must be integrated to form the system. The
primary focus at this stage is to ensure that the key
technologies that represent the system components
(assemblies and sub-systems) are well understood
and are mature enough to justify their use in a sys-
tem design and development effort. The next stage
of the life cycle involves engineering development,
so research and development (R&D) activities
conducted within the science and technology
appropriations should be completed during this
stage.
System Development and Demonstration
The decision forum for entry into the System
Development and Demonstration (SD&D) phase
is the Milestone B event. Entry into this phase rep-
resents program initiation, the formal beginning
of a system acquisition effort. This is the govern-
ment commitment to pursue the program. Entry
requires mature technology, validated require-
ments, and funding. At this point, the program re-
quirement must be defined by an Operational Re-
quirements Document (ORD). This phase consists
of two primary stages, system integration (Figure
2-4) and system demonstration (Figure 2-5).
Figure 2-4. System Development and Demonstration
(System Integration Stage)
MS B
System Level
Architecture
ORD
Previous
Phase
Tech
Review
Requirements
Review
Prototype
Demonstration
System Definition Effort
IPR
Draft Allocated Baseline
Preliminary and
Detail Design
Efforts
Approved Functional Baseline
Preliminary Design Effort
Requirements
Analysis
Requirements
Loop
Verification
Design
Loop
Functional Analysis
and Allocation
Design Synthesis
System Analysis
and Control
(Balance)
Chapter 2 Systems Engineering Management in DoD Acquisition
17
Figure 2-5. System Development and Demonstration
(System Demonstration Stage)
There is no hard and fast guidance that stipulates
precisely how the systems engineering process is
to intersect with the DoD acquisition process.
There are no specified technical events, e.g., DoD
designated technical reviews, that are to be accom-
plished during identified stages of the SD&D
phase. However, the results of a SD&D phase
should support a production go-ahead decision at
Milestone C. That being the case, the process
described below reflects a configuration control
approach that includes a system level design (func-
tional baseline), final preliminary designs (allo-
cated baselines), and detail designs (initial prod-
uct baselines). Along with their associated docu-
mentation, they represent the systems engineering
products developed during SD&D that are most
likely needed to appropriately support Milestone C.
System Integration is that stage of SD&D that
applies to systems that have yet to achieve system
level design maturity as demonstrated by the inte-
gration of components at the system level in rel-
evant environments. For an unprecedented system
(one not previously defined and developed), this
stage will continue the work begun in the compo-
nent advanced development stage, but the flavor
of the effort now becomes oriented to engineering
development, rather than the research-oriented
efforts that preceded this stage. A formal ORD,
technology assessments, and a high-level system
architecture have been established. (These will
form major inputs to the systems engineering
process.) The engineering focus becomes estab-
lishment and agreement on system level technical
requirements stated such that designs based on
those technical requirements will meet the intent
of the operational requirements. The system level
technical requirements are stabilized and docu-
mented in an approved system level requirements
specification. In addition, the system-level require-
ments baseline (functional baseline) is established.
This baseline is verified by development and
demonstration of prototypes that show that key
technologies can be integrated and that associated
risks are sufficiently low to justify developing the
system.
Requirements
Analysis
Requirements
Loop
Verification
Design
Loop
Functional
Analysis
Design Synthesis
System Analysis
and Control
(Balance)
Requirements
Analysis
Requirements
Loop
Verification
Design
Loop
Functional
Analysis
Design Synthesis
System Analysis
and Control
(Balance)
Requirements
Analysis
Requirements
Loop
Verification
Design
Loop
Functional
Analysis
Design Synthesis
System Analysis
and Control
(Balance)
Production
Readiness
and
Design
Completion
IPR
Functional
Baseline
ORD (Rev)
Previous
Phase
Design Reviews
Preliminary Design Effort
MS C
Draft Product
Baseline
Approved Functional and Allocated Baseline
Detail Design Effort
Technical Review
System Demonstration
Initial Product
Baseline
Requirements
Analysis
Requirements
Loop
Verification
Design
Loop
Functional
Analysis
Design Synthesis
System Analysis
and Control
(Balance)
Requirements
Analysis
Requirements
Loop
Verification
Design
Loop
Functional
Analysis
Design Synthesis
System Analysis
and Control
(Balance)
Systems Engineering Fundamentals Chapter 2
18
Program initiation signals the transition from an
S&T focus to management by the program office.
The R&D community, the users, and the program
office may have all been involved in defining the
concepts and technologies that will be key to the
system development. It is appropriate at this point,
therefore, to conduct a thorough requirements analy-
sis and review to ensure that the user, the contrac-
tor, and the program office all hold a common view
of the requirements and to preserve the lessons
learned through the R&D efforts conducted in the
earlier phase. The risk at this point can be high,
because misunderstandings and errors regarding
system-level requirements will flow down to sub-
sequent designs and can eventually result in over-
runs and even program failure. The contractor will
normally use the occasion of the system require-
ments review early in this stage to set the func-
tional baseline that will govern the flow-down of
requirements to lower level items as preliminary
designs are elaborated.
The Interim Progress Review held between Sys-
tem Integration and System Demonstration has no
established agenda. The agenda is defined by the
MDA and can be flexible in its timing and con-
tent. Because of the flexibility built into the
acquisition process, not all programs will conform
to the model presented here. Programs may find
themselves in various stages of preliminary design
and detailed design as the program passes from
one stage of the SD&D phase to the succeeding
stage. With these caveats, System Demonstration
(Figure 2-5) is the stage of the SD&D phase dur-
ing which preliminary and detailed designs are
elaborated, engineering demonstration models are
fabricated, and the system is demonstrated in
operationally relevant environments.
System level requirements are flowed down to the
lower level items in the architecture and require-
ments are documented in the item performance
specifications, which represent the preliminary
design requirements for those items. The item per-
formance specifications and supporting documen-
tation, when finalized, together form the allocated
baseline for the system. Design then proceeds
toward the elaboration of a detailed design for
the product or system. The product baseline is
drafted as the design is elaborated. This physical
description of the system may change as a result
of testing that will follow, but it forms the basis
for initial fabrication and demonstration of these
items. If the system has been previously designed
and fabricated, then, clearly, this process would
be curtailed to take advantage of work already
completed.
Following the elaboration of the detailed design,
components and subsystems are fabricated, inte-
grated, and tested in a bottom-up approach until
system level engineering demonstration models are
developed. These demonstration models are not,
as a rule, production representative systems.
Rather, they are system demonstration models, or
integrated commercial items, that serve the pur-
pose of enabling the developer to accomplish
development testing on the integrated system.
These models are often configured specifically to
enable testing of critical elements of the system,
for example, in the case of an aircraft development,
there may be separate engineering demonstration
models developed specifically to test the integrated
avionics subsystems, while others demonstrate the
flying qualities and flight controls subsystems.
For purposes of making decisions relative to
progress through the acquisition process, these
system-level demonstrations are not intended to
be restricted to laboratory test and demonstrations.
They are expected to include rigorous demonstra-
tions that the integrated system is capable of per-
forming operationally useful tasks under conditions
that, while not necessarily equal to the rigor of
formal operational testing, represent the eventual
environment in which the system must perform.
The result of these demonstrations provide the
confidence required to convince the decision-
maker (MDA) that the system is ready to enter the
production phase of the life cycle. This implies
that the system has demonstrated not only that
technical performance is adequate, but also that
the affordability, supportability, and producibility
risks are sufficiently low to justify a production
decision.
Chapter 2 Systems Engineering Management in DoD Acquisition
19
Figure 2-6. Production and Deployment
Production and Deployment
Milestone C is the decision forum for entry into
the Production and Deployment phase of the
program. Like other phases, this phase is also
divided into stages of development. Production
Readiness and LRIP is the first of these. At this
point, system-level demonstrations have been
accomplished and the product baseline is defined
(although it will be refined as a result of the activi-
ties undertaken during this phase). The effort is
now directed toward development of the manufac-
turing capability that will produce the product or
system under development. When a manufactur-
ing capability is established, a LRIP effort begins.
The development of a LRIP manufacturing capa-
bility has multiple purposes. The items produced
are used to proof and refine the production line
itself, items produced on this line are used for Ini-
tial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) and
Live Fire Test and Evaluation (LFT&E), and this
is also the means by which manufacturing rates
are ramped upward to the rates intended when
manufacturing is fully underway.
Following the completion of formal testing, the
submission of required Beyond-LRIP and Live Fire
Test reports, and a full-rate production decision
by the MDA, the system enters the Rate Production
and Deployment stage. After the decision to go to
full-rate production, the systems engineering
process is used to refine the design to incorporate
findings of the independent operational testing,
direction from the MDA, and feedback from
deployment activities. Once configuration changes
have been made and incorporated into production,
and the configuration and production is consid-
ered stable, Follow-on Operational Test and Evalu-
ation (FOT&E), if required, is typically performed
on the stable production system. Test results are
used to further refine the production configuration.
Once this has been accomplished and production
again becomes stable, detailed audits are held to
Rate Production and Deployment Production Readiness and LRIP
Deployment
Low Rate Initial Production
Initial Operational Test
and Live Fire Test
Full Rate Production
Establish Manufacturing Capability
Previous
Phase
ORD
Functional Configuration Audit Physical Configuration Audit
Decision
Review
Next
Phase
MS C
Requirements
Analysis
Requirements
Loop
Verification
Design
Loop
Functional Analysis
and Allocation
Design Synthesis
System
Analysis
and Control
(Balance)
Systems Engineering Fundamentals Chapter 2
20
confirm that the Product Baseline documentation
correctly describes the system being produced.
The Product Baseline is then put under formal
configuration control.
As the system is produced, individual items are
delivered to the field units that will actually em-
ploy and use them in their military missions. Care-
ful coordination and planning is essential to make
the deployment as smooth as possible. Integrated
planning is absolutely critical to ensure that the
training, equipment, and facilities that will be re-
quired to support the system, once deployed, are
in place as the system is delivered. The systems
engineering function during this activity is focused
on the integration of the functional specialties to
make certain that no critical omission has been
made that will render the system less effective than
it might otherwise be. Achieving the users required
initial operational capability (IOC) schedule de-
mands careful attention to the details of the transi-
tion at this point. Furthermore, as the system is
delivered and operational capability achieved, the
system transitions to the Sustainment and Disposal
phase of the system life cyclethe longest and
most expensive of all phases.
Sustainment and Disposal
There is no separate milestone decision required
for a program to enter this phase of the system life
cycle. The requirement for the Sustainment phase
is implicit in the decision to produce and deploy
the system. This phase overlaps the Production
phase. Systems Engineering activities in the
Sustainment phase are focused on maintaining
the systems performance capability relative to
the threat the system faces. If the military threat
changes or a technology opportunity emerges, then
the system may require modification. These
modifications must be approved at an appropriate
level for the particular change being considered.
The change then drives the initiation of new sys-
tems engineering processes, starting the cycle (or
parts of it) all over again.
Figure 2-7. Sustainment and Disposal
Production
Items
Sustainment Disposal
E
volutionary R
equirem
ents
D
evelopm
ent
E
n
g
in
e
e
r
in
g
C
h
a
n
g
e
P
r
o
p
o
s
a
ls
Block
Modifications
T
e
s
t a
n
d E
v
a
lu
a
tio
n
D
is
p
o
s
a
l
Requirements
Analysis
Requirements
Loop
Verification
Design
Loop
Functional Analysis
and Allocation
Design Synthesis
System Analysis
and Control
(Balance)
Chapter 2 Systems Engineering Management in DoD Acquisition
21
Also, in an evolutionary development environment,
there will be a continuing effort to develop and
refine additional operational requirements based
on the experience of the user with the portion of
the system already delivered. As new requirements
are generated, a new development cycle begins,
with technology demonstrations, risk reduction,
system demonstrations and testingthe same cycle
just describedall tailored to the specific needs
and demands of the technology to be added to the
core system already delivered.
The final activity in the system life cycle is Dis-
posal. System engineers plan for and conduct sys-
tem disposal throughout the life cycle beginning
with concept development. System components
can require disposal because of decommissioning,
their destruction, or irreparable damage. In addi-
tion, processes and material used for development,
production, operation, or maintenance can raise
disposal issues throughout the life cycle. Disposal
must be done in accordance with applicable laws,
regulations, and directives that are continually
changing, usually to require more severe con-
straints. They mostly relate to security and environ-
ment issues that include recycling, material recov-
ery, salvage, and disposal of by-products from
development and production.
Every Development is Different
The process described above is intended to be very
flexible in application. There is no typical sys-
tem acquisition. The process is therefore defined
to accommodate a wide range of possibilities, from
systems that have been proven in commercial
applications and are being purchased for military
use, to systems that are designed and developed
essentially from scratch. The path that the system
development takes through the process will depend
primarily on the level of maturity of the technol-
ogy employed. As explained in the preceding dis-
cussion, if the system design will rely significantly
on the use of proven or commercial items, then
process can be adjusted to allow the system to skip
phases, or move quickly from stage to stage within
phases. If the type of system is well understood
within the applicable technical domains, or it is an
advanced version of a current well understood
system, then the program definition and risk
reduction efforts could be adjusted appropriately.
It is the role of the system engineer to advise the
program manager of the recommended path that
the development should take, outlining the reasons
for that recommendation. The decision as to the
appropriate path through the process is actually
made by the MDA, normally based on the recom-
mendation of the program manager. The process
must be tailored to the specific development, both
because it is good engineering and because it is
DoD policy as part of the Acquisition Reform ini-
tiative. But tailoring must done with the intent of
preserving the requirements traceability, baseline
control, lifecycle focus, maturity tracking, and
integration inherent in the systems engineering
approach. The validity of tailoring the process
should always be a risk management issue. Acqui-
sition Reform issues will be addressed again in Part
IV of this text.
2.5 SUMMARY POINTS
The development, acquisition, and operation of
military systems is governed by a multitude of
public laws, formal DoD directives, instructions
and manuals, numerous Service and Compo-
nent regulations, and many inter-service and
international agreements.
The system acquisition life cycle process is a
model used to guide the program manager through
the process of maturing technology based sys-
tems and readying them for production and
deployment to military users.
The acquisition process model is intended to
be flexible and to accommodate systems and
technologies of varying maturities. Systems
dependent on immature technologies will take
longer to develop and produce, while those that
employ mature technologies can proceed
through the process relatively quickly.
The system engineering effort is integrated into
the systems acquisition process such that the
activities associated with systems engineering
Systems Engineering Fundamentals Chapter 2
22
(development of documentation, technical re-
views, configuration management, etc.) support
and strengthen the acquisition process. The
challenge for the engineering manager is to
ensure that engineering activities are conducted
at appropriate points in the process to ensure
that the system has, in fact, achieved the levels
of maturity expected prior to progressing into
succeeding phases.
Chapter 2 Systems Engineering Management in DoD Acquisition
23
SUPPLEMENT 2-A
TECHNOLOGY
READINESS LEVELS
Technology Readiness Level Description
1. Basic principles observed Lowest level of technology readiness. Scientific research begins
and reported. to be translated into technologys basic properties.
2. Technology concept and/or Invention begins. Once basic principles are observed, practical
application formulated. applications can be invented. The application is speculative and
there is no proof or detailed analysis to support the assumption.
Examples are still limited to paper studies.
3. Analytical and experimental Active R&D is initiated. This includes analytical studies and
critical function and/or char- laboratory studies to physically validate analytical predictions
acteristic proof of concept. of separate elements of the technology. Examples include
components that are not yet integrated or representative.
4. Component and/or bread- Basic technological components are integrated to establish that
board validation in labora- the pieces will work together. This is relatively low fidelity
tory environment. compared to the eventual system. Examples include integration
of ad hoc hardware in a laboratory.
5. Component and/or bread- Fidelity of breadboard technology increases significantly. The
board validation in relevant basic technological components are integrated with reasonably
environment. realistic supporting elements so that the technology can be
tested in simulated environment. Examples include high
fidelity laboratory integration of components.
6. System/subsystem model or Representative model or prototype system, which is well beyond
prototype demonstration in a the breadboard tested for level 5, is tested in a relevant environ-
relevant environment. ment. Represents a major step up in a technologys demon-
strated readiness. Examples include testing a prototype in a high
fidelity laboratory environment or in a simulated operational
environment.
7. System prototype demon- Prototype near or at planned operational system. Represents a
stration in an operational major step up from level 6, requiring the demonstration of an
environment. actual system prototype in an operational environment.
Examples include testing the prototype in a test bed aircraft.
(continued)
Systems Engineering Fundamentals Chapter 2
24
Technology Readiness Level Description
8. Actual system completed and Technology has been proven to work in its final form and under
qualified through test and expected conditions. In almost all cases, this level represents the
demonstration. end of true system development. Examples include develop-
mental test and evaluation of the system in its intended weapon
system to determine if it meets design specifications.
9. Actual system proven Actual application of the technology in its final form and under
through successful mission mission conditions, such as those encountered in operational
operations. test and evaluation. Examples include using the system under
operational mission conditions.
Chapter 2 Systems Engineering Management in DoD Acquisition
25
SUPPLEMENT 2-B
EVOLUTIONARY ACQUISITION
CONSIDERATIONS
As shown by Figure 2-8, evolutionary acquisition
starts with the development and delivery of a core
capability. As knowledge is gained through sys-
tem use and as technology changes, the system is
evolved to a more useful or effective product. At
the beginning of an evolutionary acquisition the
ultimate user need is understood in general terms,
but a core need that has immediate utility can be
well-defined. Because future events will affect the
eventual form of the product, the requirements can
not be fully defined at the program initiation. How-
ever, the evolutionary development must be accom-
plished in a management system that demands
The evolutionary approach to defense acquisition
is the simple recognition that systems evolve as a
result of changing user needs, technological
opportunities, and knowledge gained in operation.
Evolutionary Acquisition is not new to military
systems. No naval ship in a class is the same; air-
craft and vehicles have block changes designed to
improve the design; variants of systems perform
different missions; satellites have evolutionary
improvements between the first and last launched;
and due to fast evolving technology, computer
resources and software systems are in constant
evolution.
Figure 2-8. Evolutionary Acquisition
User Feedback
Tech Opportunity
Evolving Threat
Requirements Analysis
General for the System
Specific for the Core
Requirements Analysis
Concept of Operations
Preliminary
System
Architecture
Define Develop Operationally Test > Block A
continue as required
Flexible/Incremental ORD, TEMP, etc.
Refine and Update
Requirements
Define Develop Operationally Test > CORE
Systems Engineering Fundamentals Chapter 2
26
requirements validation, fully funded budgets, and
rigorous review. In addition, the systems engineer-
ing function remains responsible for controlling
requirements traceability and configuration con-
trol in the absence of complete definition of all
requirements or final configurations. These con-
straints and concerns require the evolutionary
approach be accomplished in a manner such the
various concerns of users, developers, and man-
agers are adequately addressed, while the risks
associated with these issues are mitigated.
Acquisition Managment
Acquisition management requirements established
in the DoD 5000 documents and associated com-
ponent regulations or instructions establish a series
of program-specific analyses, reports, and decision
documents that support the milestone decision pro-
cess. In addition, prior to decision points in the
acquisition process, substantial coordination is re-
quired with an array of stakeholders. This process
is resource consuming but necessary to establish
the programs validity in the eyes of those respon-
sible to approve the public resources committed
to the program.
Evolutionary acquisition, by its nature, represents
an acquisition within an acquisition. On one
level, the engineering manager is confronted with
the management and control of the system as it
progresses to its eventual final configuration, and,
on another level, there is the management and con-
trol of the modifications, or blocks, that are suc-
cessively integrated into the system as they are
developed. The system has associated require-
ments, baselines, reviewsthe normal elements
of a system acquisition; however, each block also
has specified requirements, configuration, and
management activities. The challenge for techni-
cal management then becomes to ensure that good
technical management principles are applied to the
development of each block, while simultaneously
ensuring that the definition and control of require-
ments and baselines at the system level include
and accommodate the evolving architecture.
System Engineering Concerns
Evolutionary acquisition will require incremental
and parallel development activities. These activi-
ties are developing evolutionary designs that
represent a modification as well as an evolved
system. The evolutionary upgrade is developed as
a modification, but the new evolved system must
be evaluated and verified as a system with new,
evolved requirements. This implies that, though
we can enter the acquisition process at any point,
the basic baselining process required by systems
engineering must somehow be satisfied for each
block upgrade to assure requirements traceability
and configuration control.
As shown by Figure 2-9, incremental delivery of
capability can be the result of an evolutionary block
upgrade or be an incremental release of capa-
bility within the approved program (or current
evolutionary block) baseline. System engineering
is concerned with both. There is no check list ap-
proach to structure these relationships, but the fol-
lowing is presented to provide some general guid-
ance in a difficult and complex area of acquisition
management planning and implementation.
Evolutionary upgrades may be based on known
operational requirements where delivery of the
capability is incremental due to immediate opera-
tional need, continuing refinement of the product
baseline prior to full operational capability, and
pre-planned parallel developments. If the modifi-
cation is only at the allocated or product baseline,
and the programs approved performance, cost, and
schedule is not impacted, then the system would
not necessarily require the management approvals
and milestones normal to the acquisition process.
In all cases, the key to maintaining a proper sys-
tems engineering effort is to assure that architec-
tures and configuration baselines used for evolu-
tionary development can be upgraded with mini-
mal impact to documented and demonstrated con-
figurations. The risk associated with this issue can
be significantly reduced through program planning
that addresses optimization of the acquisition
baseline and control of the evolving configuration.
Chapter 2 Systems Engineering Management in DoD Acquisition
27
Planning
Evolutionary acquisition program planning must
clearly define how the core and evolutionary blocks
will be structured, including:
1. A clear description of an operationally suitable
core system including identification of sub-
systems and components most likely to evolve.
2. Establishment of a process for obtaining, evalu-
ating and integrating operational feedback,
technology advancements, and emerging
commercial products.
3. Planning for evolutionary block upgrade evalu-
ation, requirements validation, and program
initiation.
4. Description of the management approach for
evolutionary upgrades within a block and the
constraints and controls associated with
incremental delivery of capability.
5. Risk analysis of the developmental approach,
both technical and managerial.
Systems engineering planning should emphasize:
1. The openness and modularity of the design
of the core system architecture in order to
facilitate modification and upgrades,
2. How baseline documentation is structured to
improve flexibility for upgrade,
3. How evolutionary acquisition planning impacts
baseline development and documentation
control,
4. How technical reviews will be structured to best
support the acquisition decision points, and
5. How risk management will monitor and con-
trol the management and technical complexity
introduced by evolutionary development.
The basic system architecture should be designed
to accommodate change. Techniques such as open
architecting, functional partitioning, modular
design, and open system design (all described later
in this book) are key to planning for a flexible
system that can be easily and affordably modified.
Figure 2-9. Incremental Release Within Evolutionary Blocks
Block A
Block B
A B C
Core
B C
B C
Block A
First Block A Release
(Related to Block A IOC)
Release 2
Release 3
Release
(Related to P3I)
Final Block A
Release
Etc.
P3I
Systems Engineering Fundamentals Chapter 2
28
Example
Table 2-1 illustrates some of the relationships dis-
cussed above as it might apply to a Major Auto-
mated Information System (MAIS) program. Due
to the nature of complex software development, a
MAIS acquisition inevitably will be an evolution-
ary acquisition. In the notional MAIS shown in
the table, management control is primarily defined
for capstone, program, subsystem or incremental
delivery, and supporting program levels. The table
provides relationships showing how key acquisi-
tion and system engineering activities correlate in
the evolutionary environment. Probably the most
important lesson of Table 2-1 is that these rela-
tionships are complex and if they are not planned
for properly, they will present a significant risk to
the program.
Table 2-1. Evolutionary Acquisition Relationships
Notional Example of Evolutionary MAIS Acquisition Relationships
Characterization System Level
Acquisition
Program
Level
Acquisition
Documentation
Required
Baseline
Overall Need
Core and
Evolutionary
Blocks
Incremental
Delivery of
Capability
Associated
Product
Improvements
Major Program
or
Business Area
Build or Block
of
Major Program
Release or
Version
of Block
Application
or
Bridge
Capstone or
Sub-Portfolio
Acquisition
Program
Internal to
Acquisition
Program
Parallel Product
Improvement
(Less than MAIS)
Capstone
Acquisition
Documentaion
Full
Program
Documentation
Separate
Acquisition
Documentation
Not Required
Component or
Lower Decision
Level Acquisition
Processing
Top Level
Functional
Baseline
Cumulative
Functional and
Allocated
Baseline
Product
Baseline
Functional,
Allocated, and
Product Baselines
CM Authority
PMO
PMO with
Contractor
Support
Contractor
(Must Meet
Allocated
Basleine)
PMO/Contractor
Summary
Acquisition oversight is directly related to the
performance, cost, and schedule defined in the
acquisition baseline. It establishes the approved
scope of the developmental effort. Evolutionary
development that exceeds the boundaries estab-
lished by the acquisition baseline requires a new
or revised acquisition review process with addi-
tional oversight requirements. The development
and approval of the ORD and Acquisition Program
Baseline are key activities that must structure an
evolutionary process that provides user and over-
sight needs, budgetary control, requirements
traceability, risk mitigation, and configuration
management.