CHARTING A NEW PATH


You start out with a few really impor- tant programs, model the behavior that you’re trying to display and build from there. So a key lesson learned is not only what you assign to an RCO to focus on, but also how much. If you give them the world, it will truly fail and collapse under its own weight.


Jones-Bonbrest: With the standup of the AFC and its eight cross-functional teams, the Army is prioritizing modern- ization. First, how can the RCO support the cross-functional teams?


It’s not about


awarding a contract, it’s not about any one functional area—it’s truly about delivering the capability.


“ ” 22 Army AL&T Magazine


Skeen: We’re already supporting the AFC and cross-functional teams. I work with Maj. Gen. James M. Richardson [the special adviser for program integra- tion in the Office of the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army] often and I’ve met with all the cross-functional team leadership. Te cross-functional teams are focused not only on delivering the Army’s six top modernization priorities, but also on getting those requirements right.


So the RCO can support the cross- functional teams by helping to refine requirements through prototyping and demonstration, by doing something quicker, smaller and then evaluating those requirements again. Ten we feed that information into a more formal program of record.


When the AFC or cross-functional teams identify a need that is a good fit for the RCO to take on, we are recognized as a tool to deliver capability quickly. So when they have a concept, a set of requirements, and the RCO looks to be a good acquisition model for them, we can approach the secretary and the chief with that idea, and if that is directed to come to the RCO, we will leverage our acquisition model to deliver that capa- bility directly.


October-December 2018


Jones-Bonbrest: What about other support to the Army Futures Command?


Skeen: One thing that is very impor- tant that I bring forward from the Air Force RCO into the Army RCO is this evaluation of the threat, and what is the capability that we need to be success- ful in the threat environment, whether it be Russia, China, etc. If we develop a capability that is not effective against the threat, it’s not terribly interesting. AFC is looking at how we achieve over- match against our near-peer competitors. Te analysis and the evaluation that the RCO can bring to take a look at a certain capability and how it would be effective against a threat, and then taking that concept and demonstrating it or proto- typing it, I think that will truly inform the AFC on the question of, “How do you stitch together the priorities and deliver game-changing overmatch against our adversaries?”


Jones-Bonbrest: With so much attention focused on AFC and cross-functional teams, will the RCO continue to work with PEOs [program executive offices] for some of its projects?


Skeen: Absolutely. We’ve had many great successes in partnering with PEOs, and that’s a very fast way to show a different model, a different acquisition approach. We did that with our elec- tronic warfare project in Europe, and that was a wonderful partnership with PEO IEW&S [Intelligence, Electronic Warfare and Sensors]. With that effort, we got to leverage the RCO charter, the RCO authorities and the excellent engi- neering and acquisition folks in the PEO to deliver a capability very quickly to the field. Tat’s another great way to change acquisition and change the culture across the Army.


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