Effective communication is one of the most important characteristics of any relationship. The development of requirements is a complex process in which concepts, technology, industry capacity and cost are extensively analyzed and documented.
As a result, PMs are responsible for cre- ating documents and processes that would be required for a validated and funded program to proceed through the acquisition process. Tese products and documents must be generated so senior leaders can assess the capability and resource sustainment dollars accordingly. What drives and directs this rigorous process, from start to finish, are the requirements documented by the TCMs. Te Army must have a valid need for the capability. Requirements spell out this need and must be integrated into the acquisition process.
DEFINING ‘REQUIREMENT’ Many PMOs
face challenges in man-
aging their requirements because, over the past several years, business has been conducted with a fundamentally differ- ent perspective of what exactly defines a requirement. Te word alone has differ- ent meanings for different people in the acquisition workforce. In the past, when responding to an ONS, a requirement meant getting a generally defined capabil- ity to the user. General and generic system characteristics such as size, electromag- netic hardening, ruggedness and weight were not a priority or a requirement when providing a solution to the end-user.
ONS and JUONS also do not have basis of issue plans (BOIPs) or a designated military occupational specialty, which are needed for a solution to transition to an enduring or institutional capabil- ity. Tis means that TCMs and PMs must closely coordinate to document the BOIP and ensure the capability is deliv- ered to units accordingly. Tis process is time consuming and requires significant logistic planning and effort. Furthermore, as PMOs transition to PORs, they are responsible for managing TRADOC- generated performance requirements, which are more defined with key per- formance parameters and key system attributes. With a capability already in the hands of the user, the transition from general to specific makes satisfying these requirements costly and difficult.
Another consequence of the ONS pro- cess is the increased risk of capability managers and document writers basing their requirement documents (in part, at least) on an existing materiel solution or capability. Much like the PM trying to catch up to the process to secure fund- ing to sustain a capability, the TCM tries to tailor requirement documents to an existing materiel solution that once satisfied an ONS.
ASC.ARMY.MIL 71 NEW AMMO
Kori Phillips, a project engineer with the Joint Service Small Arms Program, holds the new and lighter M249 rounds in her right hand and the current rounds in her left. The modified M249, known as the Cased Telescoped Light Machine Gun, is shown below and between her hands. Phillips’ exhibit was part of a media day at Picatinny Arsenal, NJ, May 4. Getting from a current capability or solution to a future one requires ICDs, CDDs and CPDs, which define the characteristics and performance parameters of a capability or materiel solution. (Photo by David Vergun)
SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
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
