$
such a gathering could be orchestrated before the program officially started.
To maintain competitive fairness, it was important that information flowed consistently across the board from the government team to the propos- ing contractors, so it made sense to pull everyone together for another industry day.
include everything from long-range
delivery and communications to non- lethal effects. It is easy to default to the familiar crowd of defense contractors we work with every day, but that’s a tall task even for them. A lot of innovation takes place in smaller, more agile companies that may be less familiar to the govern- ment team. So the question becomes, how can we reach beyond the standard FedBizOps announcement that may not catch the interest of small and nontradi- tional businesses?
What information is being shared? Te requirements, of course.
But how can you effectively communi- cate what your requirements are when they are still so broadly defined? How early is too early? If there is a docu- mented capability need, then it is not too early to start the conversation. It is critical for all parties to understand both the emerging requirements and the realm of the possible so that progress toward providing a capability is effective and efficient.
When is the appropriate time to con- duct the industry day? Te intent is for industry to help identify risks, quantify affordability and
define development
timelines. Tat is information that can feed into the AoA and ensure a well-informed path forward. Hosting an industry day does not commit the government team to anything beyond sharing the approved information.
How and where are we able to facili- tate an industry day within the limited resources and authorities of a pre- materiel development decision effort? Setting up an industry day, though it doesn’t require
substantial resources,
can be problematic prior to the pro- gram being funded. Additionally, prior to the materiel development decision the government has not committed to even entering the acquisition process. So at this point, we have no money and no commitment to investigate materiel alternatives, but we need data to inform decisions. Fortunately, the only obli- gation with an industry day is that the government will provide the venue and the information. Unfortunately, even that seemed out of reach in this case.
Most of these questions were easily
answered by focusing on the goals of the event: Inform industry of the emerging requirements and gather information on the state of relevant technology. Te dif- ficult questions became where and how
For the GLMR team, the answers came from an unexpected place.
While developing the acquisition strat- egy
for the competitive prototyping
phase, PM CCS identified a promising alternative to the traditional contract- ing approach: using other transaction agreements through the DOD Ordnance Technology Consortium (DOTC).
Te goal of DOTC is to facilitate col- laborative government, industry and academic ordnance technology develop- ment and prototyping efforts. Industry and academic members of the National Armaments Consortium (NAC), in con- junction with DOD stakeholders such as ARDEC and PEO Ammunition, form the collaborative DOTC organi- zation. With nearly 400 members, of which more than 60 percent are small businesses or nontraditional defense con- tractors, NAC and DOTC provide an opportunity to engage additional poten- tial developers outside of the traditional partners that have been working with the program manager over the past sev- eral decades. (See Figure 1.) Trough the use of a single-point contracting process, the time to award can usually be reduced, which is important when trying to get the initiatives up and running in time to be effective at informing the AoA.
DOTC was eager to partner with PM CCS for the competitive prototyping efforts, and the leadership also recog- nized an opportunity to go above and beyond for their customers while ben- efiting the membership as well. At the annual NAC general membership meet- ing, there was time available that could be used for the GLMR industry day. Furthermore, accommodations could
ASC.ARMY.MIL 119
BBP 3.0
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
