$
To make candid, incisive debate possible, the JROC has refocused its meetings to be more like those of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) in their secure conference room known as “the tank.”
Whereas JROC meetings used to com- prise “five four-stars who are trying to have a discussion with a cast of thousands behind them,” Stapp said, now only the principals are invited: the five voting members—the Vice Chairman of the JCS, who chairs the JROC, and the four ser- vice Vice Chiefs of Staff—and one guest each, as well as the statutory advisors to the committee—the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)); USD for Policy; USD (Comptroller); Director, Opera- tional Test and Evaluation; and Director, Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation.
The purpose is to allow for as much trade space as possible, Stapp said. “Anything that touches [a particular] mission, the JROC’s going to look at, every single capability,” to determine the appropriate levels of risk and investment in program requirements, he said. Similarly, the Vice Chairman reserves the right at any time to reevaluate a requirement if a program is over budget and behind schedule, Stapp said. While the JROC does not control acquisition funds, it can decertify require- ments, in consultation with USD(AT&L).
The JROC wants to look at all possible alternatives when reviewing capabilities, as well as nonmaterial solutions, such as changes in doctrine or tactics, techniques, and procedures, Stapp said. Across the board, the JROC will ask, “Is there an opportunity for us to harvest money? The key in the Department right now is har- vesting money.”
In addition to Urgent Operational Needs and Joint Urgent Operational Needs
WE’RE SAYING, TEE UP YOUR ISSUE. IF YOU THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT, IF YOU THINK THIS FILLS A WARFIGHTING GAP, TEE UP,
BECAUSE OUR JOB IS TO FIGURE OUT HOW
Statements, the JROC has opened a third avenue of requirements determination, Stapp said: Joint Emerging Operational Needs, with a horizon of up to five years, to be validated by the Vice Chairman.
All documentation for requirements will be subject to limits on length, Stapp said. The Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) already has these, he noted. “We just don’t bother to follow our own rules. We are no lon- ger looking for 100 percent fidelity on every problem set” in documents, he said.
“We’re going to handle it like an RFP. You exceed the page count, and it gets kicked.”
While Stapp acknowledged that “within the requirements community, it’s going to be chaos for a while” as people get used to changes in the JROC process, an overarch- ing message of the changes is that “we own the process. It should be a slave to us. We reserve the right to change the process how- ever we want” to ensure valid requirements based on good information regarding cost, schedule, and performance, he said.
“JROCs are going to be like snowflakes. There are not going to be any two that are the same,” Stapp said.
IMPORTANT IT IS.”
Asked what program managers need to do to prepare for this more fluid JROC process, Stapp said, “go through their pro- gram very thoroughly. … determine are you on cost, are you on schedule. We’re saying, tee up your issue. If you think this is important, if you think this fills a warf- ighting gap, tee up, because our job is to figure out how important it is.”
The JROC is also looking for proposed ways to scale back requirements if pos- sible with a reasonable degree of risk, and for possible joint solutions, Stapp said.
“We want everybody looking at these,” especially in the area of information tech- nology. “We want to start forcing more joint solutions. If you’re facing the same threat, you’re going to go to the same system. We are not going to do unique systems for each service anymore. It is way, way too expensive.”
MARGARET C. ROTH is the Senior Editor of Army AL&T Magazine. She holds a B.A. in Russian language and linguistics from the University of Virginia. Roth has more than a decade of experience in writing about the Army and more than two decades’ experience in journalism and public relations.
ASC.ARMY.MIL 125
”
EFFICIENCIES
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
