A STRONG LENS
WHAT ARE THE RELATIVE PRIORITIES, AND WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO TRADE? AFTER YOU DO THOSE PRIORITIZATIONS, IS THE PORTFOLIO HEALTHY FOR THE LONG TERM? OR DO YOU STILL HAVE PROBLEMS YOU CAN’T SOLVE?
- egy to individual
requirements within
the Army,” Markowitz noted. “We’re much better at marrying national strat- egy to formations and units: How many brigades does it take, how many corps, divisions? That’s a very clean map, but to come back down to something like an enabler, like equipping, it’s kind of a dif- ferent lens.”
In addition to validating, modifying, or terminating requirements, the CPR pro- cess allows the Army to:
Develop a baseline understanding of all requirements.
Ensure that funds are programmed, budgeted, and executed against vali- dated requirements
and cost- and Revalidate
risk-informed alternatives. portfolios
through an
examination of combatant command- ers’ operational needs, wartime lessons learned, Army Force Generation, emerging technologies, affordability, interest, and opportunity.
DIFFERENCES AMONG PORTFOLIOS The Army has established 11 Operating Force CPRs and currently two CPRs for “Special Topics,” loosely aligned with the Generating Force (see Figure 2).
The Operating Force CPRs are: Mis- sion Command; Aviation; Intelligence,
16
Surveillance, and Reconnaissance; Move- ment
and Maneuver; Fires (Indirect);
Network; Fires (Air and Missile Defense); Assured Mobility and Protection; Sus- tainment (Transport); Sustainment; and Soldier. The Special Topics are Training and the Organic Industrial Base.
Each portfolio poses its own challenges, Markowitz said, and the CPR process recognizes these differences.
For example, he said, “Some portfolios have a better longer-term view or strategy of where they need to be in the future than others. I think Aviation has a bet- ter long-term view, and that’s one where we have to have a steady vision because it takes a long time to develop an aircraft. So they have a long-term view of, say, the - ance Apache, Black Hawk, and Chinook recapitalization rates with investments in the future.”
Another portfolio that stands out, for a different reason, is Network, Markowitz said. “You have such a high technology turnover. The basic question is, why have a 10-year development plan when technol- ogy is going to outpace it in two or three years? The NIE [Network Integration Evaluation] … is now trying to move away from longer-term development to shorter- term development, which is appropriate.” (See related article on Page 22.)
training, individual
”
The Special Topics, too, have unique considerations, he said. The Training Portfolio, for example, encompasses insti- tutional
training,
and collective training. “What are the requirements for each? Are they in bal- have the right balance in individual and collective training between simulations and live?” Markowitz said.
LESSONS LEARNED In the past six months alone, the Army has conducted at least 20 CPRs; most portfolios have undergone more than one CPR. This fall, the G-3 will re-synchro- nize with emerging Army 2020 Strategy guidance and POM 15-19.
While CPRs have accomplished a great deal, especially in revalidating require- ments and identifying redundancies, there is room for improvement in the CPR process, said Markowitz, who sin- gled out two areas: sustainability, and science and technology (S&T).
“We haven’t done very well at overall sus- and life cycle,” he said. “We’ve done that for a few of the portfolios but not holisti- cally across all.”
In S&T, “we’ve also not done very well because that really has to do with the longer-term portions” of the review. “It’s
Army AL&T Magazine
”
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
