and I use the term “cultural” specifically because it’s going to take us time.
What can industry do to support that?
A lot of what we’re doing now is organiz- ing our field service support. Who does the unit go to if they need help? Right now, they go to whoever is in civilian clothes walking beside them at the com- bat training centers (CTCs) or in the motor pool. We’re looking at not only how to organize that structure to make sure the unit readiness is supported adequately, but that the support is also streamlined and optimized. A lot of this comes down to training.
During CTC rotations, 95 percent of the trouble tickets that are coming in are
user-level issues that could be handled by the Soldier, such as basic troubleshooting procedures and user-level maintenance tasks. Of those, 75 percent should have been addressed through training. So we need industry to look at their train- ing packages and streamline them. It currently takes us 24 weeks to do new equipment training/new equipment field- ing [NET/NEF]. We have to get better at that.
We are approaching this challenge from both sides right now. Materiel developers who are designing the next communica- tion or mission command system need to stay focused on smaller, simpler and stan- dardized. However, given the timelines for new capability development, this will take some time to affect unit readiness.
At the same time, we need to ensure that there are multiple opportunities, venues and means for units to train at home sta- tion and not rely so heavily on NET or the formal schoolhouse. You either make it simple on the front end when you field a piece of kit, or you pay for it on the back end with training. So we missed the front end on some of our currently fielded equipment. What we are asking industry to do, as we move forward devel- oping capabilities, is: Don’t forget simple, smaller, standardized and faster.
You’ve been in your new position as APEO since June. What unique per- spective do you bring to the world of acquisition?
I had little preconceived notion of PEO C3T prior to arriving, other than that the PEO was providing
connectivity
and integration of the various programs within the portfolio to enable mission command at all echelons. Acquiring the capabilities the Army requires is extremely challenging given the complexity of the technology and the constant evolution of commercial capabilities. An even greater challenge is transferring these capabilities and technology to the operational force and ensuring their readiness.
ON THE ROBOT’S TRAIL
Sgt. 1st Class Kyle R. Kinard, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command capabilities manager for explosive ordnance disposal, walks with a project site manager as they assess the capabilities of the Andros FX unmanned ground vehicle before the Army Warfighting Assessment (AWA) 17.1 in October 2016 at Fort Bliss, Texas. AWA allows industry engineers to work side by side with Soldiers to rapidly correct and improve capabilities. (U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Cashmere Jefferson, 7th Mobile Public Affairs Detachment)
Tis work is complex and data intensive. Tose themes—data, complexity and operational environment—are why I’m here. Te Army seized on the opportu- nity to leverage the operations research skills of one of its general officers while also exposing him to the broader acqui- sition community. What I bring is a comfort level with data, a comfort level with complexity. What we do for
the
Army is critical or structured thinking, helping leaders synthesize meaning from the data and clearly communicating that meaning in support of decisions.
ASC.ARMY.MIL
59
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
