MEASURING THE IMPACT


An underbody live-fire test examines the degree of vehicle protection against improvised explosive devices. Tests such as these are an integral part of acquisition, and the AMSAA risk team developed SREDM to incorporate historical data on duration time for such lower-level events within each acquisition phase and to use the data in corresponding statistical schedule-risk assessment models. (Photo courtesy of U.S. Army Research Laboratory Survivability/Lethality Analysis Directorate)


acquisition decisions, but the risk assessments are also informative to the program office.


Te Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 (WSARA) renewed the emphasis on risk assessments and high- lighted a need for a more quantitative, independent approach to support


the


AoA. Before WSARA, risk assessments were typically qualitative, and the meth- odology for each AoA was inconsistent. Senior Army leaders involved in the AoA process—for example, the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command’s Analysis Center and Army Capabili- ties Integration Center, HQDA G-3/5/7 and OSD-CAPE—wanted more robust, repeatable methodologies, incorporat- ing historical data when possible, to strengthen the overall AoA product.


In response to WSARA, AMSAA ini- tiated an Army risk integrated product team (IPT) in March 2011, at the direc- tion of the senior Army analysis leaders involved in the AoA process. Te lead- ership tasked the team to develop and continuously improve independent and quantitative technical, schedule and cost risk assessment methods to support AoAs and other major Army acquisition studies. (See Figure 1 on Page 72.)


A NEW METHOD In April 2012, AMSAA developed and implemented the schedule risk data decision methodology (SRDDM). Tis comprehensive, statistically rigorous approach assesses the probability that each materiel alternative being considered in an AoA or other acquisition study will complete a given


phase—for example, engineering and manufacturing development (EMD)— within the time frame established in the program manager’s (PM’s) acquisition schedule.


SRDDM accomplishes this through the use of historical data on phase duration times for analogous acquisition programs—those with schedule drivers similar to what might arise during development of the new program—such that the duration times from these past program phases will adequately represent the variability in completion time for the new program. Tese data form the basis for a distribution of possible schedule outcomes to calculate the probability of completing an acquisition phase. A confidence interval for this probability provides an estimated margin of error.


ASC.ARMY.MIL 71


ACQUISITION


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196  |  Page 197  |  Page 198  |  Page 199  |  Page 200