WJTC Joint Functional Schools. Joint Deployment Training Center. Joint Targeting School. Joint Concepts. White Papers. Concepts Links. Interorganizational Documents. Insights and Best Practices. History Publications. Joint Force Quarterly.
Program/Construction Management - Parsons
DOD Issuances. The Anbar Awakening. The successful integration of these diverse elements is the very essence of project management. Models also help us to visualize the total scope of a project and see its division into phases and decision points. The interaction and overlapping of many and varied activities such as planning, engineering, test and evaluation, logistics, manufacturing, etc. Striving for commonality across diverse business areas and product commodities, it provides a generic framework as a structure for understanding the management of a project or program.
Project management difficulty climbs as system complexity and technological uncertainty increase, but is simplified by division of the effort into phases, with points between for management review and decision. The conclusion of a project phase is generally marked by a review of both key deliverables and project performance to a determine if the project should continue into its next phase and b detect and correct errors cost effectively.
These phase-end reviews are often called phase exits, stage gates, control gates, or kill points. Models of program structure are important to DoD when communicating the overall acquisition strategy of a large acquisition project.
The revision of the series was published after a rigorous effort to reform the defense acquisition system during the first half of the Clinton administration. The model Figure is streamlined and simple and depicts only four phases and four decision reviews.
U.S. Military Program Management (Lessons Learned and Best Practices)
Another key change from the model was the very deliberate move of the declaration of program initiation from Milestone 0 to Milestone I. In , the average was months.
Figure Defense systems acquisition management process. The current model Figure has five phases and six potential decision reviews. The most apparent, but perhaps least significant, change between the models is from numerical to alphabetical designation of major milestone reviews.
Another obvious—and important—change is the appearance of divided phases and within-phase decision and progress reviews. With the latest release of the regulatory series, these additional subphases or work efforts , along with pre-acquisition activities, have brought the total number of distinct activity intervals to eight, with as many as five phases and six decision reviews—more than at any time past. Each of these subphase efforts has its own entrance and exit criteria, making them more in practice like distinct phases of acquisition.
All of the reviews are conducted at OSD level. Newest is the design readiness review, an evolution of the critical design review which had heretofore been a PM-level technical review in the previous interim model—and before that a mid-phase interim progress review.
This model has several other significant implications, regarding placement of the milestones and activities, that this article does not address. Defense Acquisition Management Framework. The current policy describes reviews as decision points where decision makers can stop, extend, or modify the program, or grant permission to proceed to the next phase. Program reviews of any kind at the OSD level have a significant impact on program management offices.
Much documentation must be prepared and many preparatory meetings conducted en route to the ultimate review.go here
U.S. Military Program Management
And while non-milestone reviews are generally considered to be easier to prepare for, a considerable amount of effort managing the decision process is still expended. For many years, six months have been allotted for OSD-level review preparation. Some representatives from program management offices keep an accounting of travel and labor costs associated with milestone reviews for an MDAP system. While only anecdotal data was available for this research, it is apparent that a substantial amount of program office funding is expended on items such as government agency or support contractor assistance, with supporting analyses and documentation, presentation materials, frequent travel to the Pentagon, and other associated expenses in preparation for high-level reviews.
With evolutionary acquisition as the preferred strategy, the policy now describes notional systems as shorter developments in system development and demonstration SDD with iterative Milestone B-to-C cycles. The new DoDI The diamond icons represent decision reviews. What becomes more apparent here is the increased number of actual decision reviews required, as well as the concurrent activities involved in managing a separate follow-on development increment and its requisite reviews.
In fact, the most recent published guidance shows an example of a system with two increments of evolution having no less than fourteen reviews in its first eleven years from concept decision.
It seems in the least to be counter to the policy espousing decentralized responsibility, innovation, and flexibility at the program management level. No major program has yet gone through the entire model, and none will for many years to come. Back in —89, military research fellows studying commercial practices at the Defense Systems Management College wrote about an imbalance of authority between PMs and the OSD staff. This arrangement would provide much needed program stability. The concept of control also is a cornerstone of cybernetics, or the study of organizations, communications, and control in complex systems.
It focuses on looped feedback mechanisms, where the controller communicates the desired future state to the controlled, and the controlled communicates to the controller information with which to form perceptions for use in comparing states. The controller then communicates directs purposeful behavior. Collection was found to be collected electronically with analysis usually occurring at the end of project execution. Implementation typically occurs in meetings with changes to work processes.
Overall, LLPs are essential to the construction industry.
- Quick and Easy Recipes Hot and Spicy : Curries Bakes Pies and More That Will Delight Your Taste Buds (Quick and Easy Recipes - Series 1 Book 4)!
- Crimson on the Dance Floor by Stephani Hecht;
- Lady Outlaw.
- Verschoyle Surname;
LLs will become even more important as employees age and retire and turnover increases. Additionally, globalization also increases the need for LLPs to ensure that an organization is able to address critical issues such as culture, language, distance, and diversity. Every organization should move forward in developing or improving a lessons learned program. RS, p. An organization benefits from lessons learned most when they follow a documented, formalized three-step process; collection, analysis, and implementation.
Implementation is typically less advanced than collection and analysis. All of these areas must be addressed by an organization to effectively implement a lessons learned program. Before a lessons learned program can become successful, an organization must recognize some special considerations such as legal issues, metrics, cultural and globalization issues, and implementation challenges. IR, p.
U.S. Military Program Management: Lessons Learned and Best Practices
Human resources and IT resources are important in making sure a lessons learned program is successful. Instead, the organizations generated similar, yet customized IT tools to facilitate their program. Additionally, none of the surveyed organizations currently dedicates a full-time employee to facilitate their lessons learned program, though their effort is typically beyond one full-time equivalent employee at any time. Hard metrics are not commonly used to assess the performance of lessons learned programs.
Most of the surveyed organizations implement a lessons learned program because they understand the fundamental importance of lessons learned and do not try to quantify the value of lessons learned. IR, Implementation of Lessons Learned Programs Can help organizations put these recommendations into action and includes 4 tools. For organizations that have already developed a lessons learned program:.