• Home
  • Resources
    • Find Resources by Topic Tags
    • Cybersecurity Policy Chart
    • CSIAC Reports
    • Webinars
    • Podcasts
    • Cybersecurity Digest
    • Standards & Reference Docs
    • Journals
    • Certifications
    • Acronym DB
    • Cybersecurity Related Websites
  • Services
    • Free Technical Inquiry
    • Core Analysis Task (CAT) Program
    • Subject Matter Expert (SME) Network
    • Training
    • Contact Us
  • Community
    • Upcoming Events
    • Cybersecurity
    • Modeling & Simulation
    • Knowledge Management
    • Software Engineering
  • About
    • About the CSIAC
    • The CSIAC Team
    • Subject Matter Expert (SME) Support
    • DTIC’s IAC Program
    • DTIC’s R&E Gateway
    • DTIC STI Program
    • FAQs
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Login / Register

CSIAC

Cyber Security and Information Systems Information Analysis Center

  • Resources
    • Find Resources by Topic Tags
    • Cybersecurity Policy Chart
    • CSIAC Reports
    • Webinars
    • Podcasts
    • Cybersecurity Digest
    • Standards & Reference Docs
    • Journals
    • Certifications
    • Acronym DB
    • Cybersecurity Websites
  • Services
    • Free Technical Inquiry
    • Core Analysis Task (CAT) Program
    • Subject Matter Expert (SME) Network
    • Training
    • Contact
  • Community
    • Upcoming Events
    • Cybersecurity
    • Modeling & Simulation
    • Knowledge Management
    • Software Engineering
  • About
    • About the CSIAC
    • The CSIAC Team
    • Subject Matter Expert (SME) Support
    • DTIC’s IAC Program
    • DTIC’s R&E Gateway
    • DTIC STI Program
    • FAQs
  • Cybersecurity
  • Modeling & Simulation
  • Knowledge Management
  • Software Engineering
/ Journal Issues / Cost Estimation & Systems Acquisition / A Roadmap for Reforming the DoD’s Acquisition of Information Technology

A Roadmap for Reforming the DoD’s Acquisition of Information Technology

Published in Software Tech News
Volume: 15 Number: 1 - Cost Estimation & Systems Acquisition

Author: John M. Gilligan
Posted: 03/14/2016 | Leave a Comment

Point 1:  Break programs into ~12-18 month projects

The primary objective of Point 1 is to reduce the risk of IT acquisition efforts by very consciously forcing rapid delivery of useful capabilities.  Studies have repeatedly shown that smaller projects have a much higher chance of success [Ref 8].  Despite this knowledge, DoD continues to use acquisition processes for IT capabilities that encourage larger programs and extended development or procurement timelines.  The solution is straightforward: mandate that IT projects deliver usable capabilities in 12 months or less.  In addition to reducing risk, shorter timelines for providing capabilities to users permits timely user feedback that can be incorporated into successive deliveries helping to ensure capabilities are matching user needs.   The Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has recognized this concept in their recent establishment of the “IT Box” construct for defining requirements [Ref 9].  In essence, the IT Box forces requirements to be constrained to fit within a “time-box”, a set calendar window of development time, so that they can be developed and fielded rapidly.

In order to implement short-duration projects, larger requirements must be divided so that sub portions can be developed and fielded quickly.   Agile development methods ensure continuous communication between developers and users minimizing risk that user needs are not understood by the developers [Ref 10}.  Use of common IT platforms (see Point 3 below) permits development efforts to address mission capabilities immediately rather than spending months or perhaps years developing a custom infrastructure platform to meet a user requirement.  The recommended metric and action for this point is the following:  ruthlessly cancel IT projects that do not deliver capabilities useful to the user community within 12 months (the goal is 6 months or less).

Many will assess the 12-month metric and what might be perceived as a draconian recommended action and conclude that this guideline just cannot apply to DoD.  They will argue that DoD is too big and its IT solutions too complex to mandate delivery within 12 months for all IT projects.  I note in particular that those involved in business enterprise resources planning (ERP) efforts appear to have grown comfortable with fielding timelines that rival those of major weapons programs, often taking a decade or more before delivery of useful capabilities (or in many cases a decision to cancel the program).

It is the case that the  complex IT needs of DoD will most often require solutions that are large and complex, therefore necessitating that larger requirements be divided into multiple, perhaps many, short duration projects.  DoD’s system engineers must be directed to determine how to best subdivide larger solutions into “bite-sized” pieces.  The response from a program manager or engineer that it cannot be done is false and must be rejected.

In order to develop larger IT solutions through a number of short-duration, quick-delivery projects, there is a need to focus significant attention on how to ensure compatibility and interoperability among the separately-developed IT capabilities. This requires employment of formal engineering disciplines such as architectures, standards, iterative testing, and continuous integration.  While these engineering disciplines are often employed in DoD IT acquisition efforts, they are most often used withina monolithic program rather than across many projects that may be developed independently.  The additional consequence of the current approach is so-called “stove pipe” IT solutions that cannot be effectively integrated into the larger DoD system of systems context.

Fortunately, there are examples of DoD organizations programs that have successfully implementing complex IT efforts with short-duration projects that deliver capabilities to users very quickly.  The team that compiled the Report to Congress identified a number of examples in each of the military services, including DISA, TRANSCOM and DLA.  In these examples, short duration projects were effective in delivering incremental capabilities to users in less than 12 months. Success in these examples necessitated that the organizations mature the engineering disciplines necessary to ensure the effective interoperation of the separately-developed, incremental projects.  Moreover, each of these projects have shown dramatically reduced risk and increased user satisfaction.

DoD’s challenge with implementing short duration, agile projects is twofold.  First, DoD must overcome the current cultural comfort with IT programs taking multiple years to deliver capabilities.  Unfortunately, many in DoD sincerely believe that it must take years to deliver IT capabilities! Second, and perhaps more significantly, the common practice of “thorough” implementation of DoD 5000 process steps (i.e., not taking advantage of tailoring opportunities) influences acquisition programs toward larger increments and less rapid delivery.  Program managers often start with the objective of rapid fielding only to be consumed by the “mandated” documentation and well-intended oversight activities that quickly erase any hopes of rapid fielding.  Moreover, it is not just the design program analysis and software development efforts that must be done more quickly to achieve the 12 month target.  Contracting, testing, and project oversight decisions must align with the objective of 12 month (or less) deliveries.  Contracting and test are separately addressed in Points 2 and 4.

It is useful to conclude the discussion on Point 1 with the observation made in the opening sentence—shorter duration projects are less risky and therefore can and should be done with less oversight and documentation.  Rather than using surrogates such as documents to assess progress, with rapid capability delivery the end user provides direct, high-fidelity feedback by actually using the capability.  Based on user feedback, successive projects can be modified, cancelled, or accelerated.  A DoD mandate to field IT projects in 12 months or less with penalty of project cancellation will provide the motivation to overcome resistance to change.   In addition, this mandate must force each of the critical processes supporting capability delivery (oversight, design, development, test, contracting, etc.) to operate on the same expedited timelines.

Pages: Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8

Previous Article:
« Selling Your Software Estimate
Next Article:
History is the Key to Estimation Success »

Author

John M. Gilligan
John M. Gilligan
John M. Gilligan is president of the Gilligan Group, Inc., an IT consulting firm. Prior to his current position he was a senior vice president and director, Defense Sector, at SRA International, Inc. Mr. Gilligan has over 25 years of managerial experience in leading large information technology organizations. He has expertise in acquisition, organizational innovation, program implementation, and IT Security. Recently, Mr. Gilligan served on the Obama-Biden Transition Team focusing on IT within the DoD and Intelligence Communities. Mr. Gilligan has served as the chief information officer for the United States Air Force and the U.S. Department of Energy. He was program executive officer for battle management and command and control for the Air Force. He was a member of the Cyber Security Commission (formed to advise the 44th President). He serves as Chairman of the boards of directors for the Center for Internet Security and for HDT Global, Inc. He is also on the boards of Schafer Corporation, the Software Engineering Institute, and the Armed Forces Communications and Electronics Association. Mr. Gilligan has been a recipient of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Distinguished Civilian Service Medal, Distinguished Executive Presidential Rank Award, Meritorious Executive Presidential Rank Award, and Computerworld’s Premier 100 IT Leaders to name a few. He earned an M.S.E. in Computer Engineering from Case Western Reserve University and an M.B.A. in finance from Virginia Tech University.

Reader Interactions

Leave a Comment Cancel

You must be logged in to post a comment.

sidebar

Blog Sidebar

Featured Content

Data Privacy Day - Jan 28

Data Privacy Day is January 28th

You can help create a global community that respects privacy, safeguards data, and enables trust. You can help teach others about privacy at home, at work, and in your community.

Learn How

Featured Subject Matter Expert (SME): Daksha Bhasker

A dynamic CSIAC SME, Senior Principal Cybersecurity Architect, Daksha Bhasker has 20 years of experience in the telecommunications services provider industry. She has worked in systems security design and architecture in production environments of carriers, often leading multidisciplinary teams for cybersecurity integration, from conception to delivery of complex technical solutions. As a CSIAC SME, Daksha's contributions include several published CSIAC Journal articles and a webinar presentation on the sophiscated architectures that phone carriers use to stop robocalls.

View SME's Contributed Content

The DoD Cybersecurity Policy Chart

The DoD Cybersecurity Policy Chart

This chart captures the tremendous breadth of applicable policies, some of which many cybersecurity professionals may not even be aware, in a helpful organizational scheme.

View the Policy Chart

CSIAC Report - Smart Cities, Smart Bases and Secure Cloud Architecture for Resiliency by Design

Integration of Smart City Technologies to create Smart Bases for DoD will require due diligence with respect to the security of the data produced by Internet of Things (IOT) and Industrial Internet of Things (IIOT). This will increase more so with the rollout of 5G and increased automation "at the edge". Commercially, data will be moving to the cloud first, and then stored for process improvement analysis by end-users. As such, implementation of Secure Cloud Architectures is a must. This report provides some use cases and a description of a risk based approach to cloud data security. Clear understanding, adaptation, and implementation of a secure cloud framework will provide the military the means to make progress in becoming a smart military.

Read the Report

CSIAC Journal - Data-Centric Environment: Rise of Internet-Based Modern Warfare “iWar”

CSIAC Journal Cover Volume 7 Number 4

This journal addresses a collection of modern security concerns that range from social media attacks and internet-connected devices to a hypothetical defense strategy for private sector entities.

Read the Journal

CSIAC Journal M&S Special Edition - M&S Applied Across Broad Spectrum Defense and Federal Endeavors

CSIAC Journal Cover Volume 7 Number 3

This Special Edition of the CSIAC Journal highlights a broad array of modeling and simulation contributions – whether in training, testing, experimentation, research, engineering, or other endeavors.

Read the Journal

CSIAC Journal - Resilient Industrial Control Systems (ICS) & Cyber Physical Systems (CPS)

CSIAC Journal Cover Volume 7 Number 2

This edition of the CSIAC Journal focuses on the topic of cybersecurity of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), particularly those that make up Critical Infrastructure (CI).

Read the Journal

Recent Video Podcasts

  • Agile Condor: Supercomputing at the Edge for Intelligent Analytics Series: CSIAC Webinars
  • Securing the Supply Chain: A Hybrid Approach to Effective SCRM Policies and Procedures Series: The CSIAC Podcast
  • DoD Vulnerability Disclosure Program (VDP) Series: CSIAC Webinars
  • 5 Best Practices for a Secure Infrastructure Series: The CSIAC Podcast
  • Fifth Generation Cellular – A Discussion with Idaho National Laboratory on 5G – Part 4 Series: Fifth Generation Cellular
View all Podcasts

Upcoming Events

Mon 18

SANS Stay Sharp: Blue Team Operations 2021

January 18 - January 20
Organizer: SANS Institute
Mon 18

SANS Cyber Security Central: Jan 2021

January 18 - January 23
Organizer: SANS Institute
Tue 19

AI Champions, Online – Supply Chain

January 19 @ 14:00 - January 21 @ 15:30 EST
Thu 21

SANS Cyber Threat Intelligence Summit 2021

January 21 - January 22
Organizer: SANS Institute
Fri 22

SANS Cyber Threat Intelligence Solutions Track 2021

January 22 @ 09:00 - 17:00 EST
Organizer: SANS Institute
View all Events

Footer

CSIAC Products & Services

  • Free Technical Inquiry
  • Core Analysis Tasks (CATs)
  • Resources
  • Events Calendar
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Product Feedback Form

About CSIAC

The CSIAC is a DoD-sponsored Center of Excellence in the fields of Cybersecurity, Software Engineering, Modeling & Simulation, and Knowledge Management & Information Sharing.Learn More

Contact Us

Phone:800-214-7921
Email:info@csiac.org
Address:   266 Genesee St.
Utica, NY 13502
Send us a Message
US Department of Defense Logo USD(R&E) Logo DTIC Logo DoD IACs Logo

Copyright 2012-2021, Quanterion Solutions Incorporated

Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Accessibility Information
Accessibility / Section 508 | FOIA | Link Disclaimer | No Fear Act | Policy Memoranda | Privacy, Security & Copyright | Recovery Act | USA.Gov

This website uses cookies to provide our services and to improve your experience. By using this site, you consent to the use of our cookies. To read more about the use of our site, please click "Read More". Otherwise, click "Dismiss" to hide this notice. Dismiss Read More
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled

Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.

Non-necessary

Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.