search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
ACQUISITION AS A TEAM SPORT


As an example of efficiency, he noted that the AMPV Product Assurance and Test Directorate’s efforts with the OSD and Army test communities have not only controlled program costs but also reduced schedule risk. In addition, from an execu- tion perspective, the program’s collaboration with the MCoE has been instrumental in looking at requirements at all levels (including key performance parameters) and conducting oper- ational risk assessments to determine whether the AMPV’s design is still operationally suitable and effective. Tat, in turn, will set up the program for greater success during engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) test activities.


Landy worked for several years on the Future Combat Systems program, eventually leading the 80-person System of Systems Engineering and Integration Directorate, where he learned that


“time was my most valuable resource.” He said, “Tere was never enough time to try and address every issue—the position forced me to focus on those issues most critical to my organiza- tion’s success and the needs of the associates working for me.”


He also chaired the source selection evaluation board for an acquisition category (ACAT) I program, which taught him how industry responds to government-issued requests for proposals, how to push industry to address critical needs, and the dynam- ics of senior-level decision-making. He also was the deputy product manager for requirements management and analysis for the Ground Combat Vehicle program, which taught him how to see a program from the stakeholder’s perspective.


Landy believes that the greatest satisfaction with the AMPV program will be when “we hand off the first unit set of AMPVs.” Until then, he said, satisfaction comes at smaller levels— making decisions that maintain program continuity while balancing risk, seeing associates digging into execution issues and finding solutions, and responding to external stakehold- ers’ concerns and seeing their approval of what the program is doing.


His advice to others is to seek diversity in assignments—learn about the different functions required to execute an acquisi- tion program (contracting, financial management, logistics, test, organizational construct, etc.). “Compete for positions on smaller acquisition programs that will require greater self- reliance and responsibilities than what you may be exposed to on larger programs,” he said. “Seek professional development training on leadership, management, supervision, negotiation, consensus building and stakeholder management.”


Kevin Houser


“Open, honest, transparent and frequent communication of program status and how stakeholders can support us is a major factor in the program’s success.”


Landy is Level III certificated in both program management and engineering with a B.S. in chemical engineering from the Uni- versity of Detroit and an M.S. in hazardous waste management from Wayne State University’s School of Chemical Engineering.


AMPV Director of Engineer- ing Kevin Houser has 34 years of experience, along with an M.S. in computer and informa- tion systems from the University of Detroit Mercy and a B.S. in mechanical engineering from Wayne State University. He’s Level III certified in engineer- ing and in program management. He oversees two engineering branches, comprising 25 engi- neering personnel who serve as an integrated product team (IPT)


in concert with the manufacturer’s engineers to design, develop, integrate and test AMPV systematically.


Experience has taught Houser that the Army typically wants an item faster (how can you speed up delivery and fielding?); bean counters want it at less cost (what can you do to make it cheaper?);


the user representatives want more capability


(requirements creep: What if we added this?); and the oversight team wants to ensure that whatever happens is traced to a docu- ment, i.e., a reduction in requirements can still be traced to the capability development document (CDD). A balanced approach allows the PM to reduce the tensions among the stakeholders and stay on track to deliver a vehicle that is “good enough with- out gold plating.”


144


Army AL&T Magazine October-December 2016


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  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192