ARMY DATA: FROM THE FOXHOLE TO THE PENTAGON
ADAPTING TO THE ENEMY By summer 2018, IPPS-A was on track for deployment to the Pennsylvania Army National Guard by the end of the year. Tis effort began with the risk reduc- tion event to test end-to-end business processes of IPPS-A and ensure that the system could subsume the functionality of the Standard Installation and Division Personnel Reporting System, the primary human resources database used by the Army National Guard. Te event enabled us to ensure that the outputs were accu- rate and consistent with National Guard requirements, and provided a precheck to normal testing procedures. Te risk reduc- tion event was followed by the systems acceptance test, a critical milestone that would provide a more comprehensive test of the system’s ability to accomplish busi- ness processes.
As we proceeded through the develop- ment process, we learned how to optimize communication between IPPS-A’s internal teams (including developers) and external stakeholders and to work together as one cross-functional, agile team. I believe this was the secret to our success. Our team realized that by nesting with our Army
MODERNIZED, STREAMLINED, READY
By streamlining processes across Reserve, National Guard and active-duty components, IPPS-A enables the Army to optimize Soldiers’ capabilities and maximize contributions to Army readiness.
IPPS-A standardizes business practices, provides authoritative data for military personnel, and
facilitates a continuum of services across all three components.
National Guard counterparts and the system integrator developers, we could shorten the decision cycle to improve the system and perform critical fixes to make it work more efficiently. Tis enhanced our collective ability to address key data and coding issues, with strong results that would ensure that IPPS-A would be deliv- ered on time and built right to meet the needs of the Army National Guard.
By the time we reached the systems acceptance test, we had established four collaborative teams tasked with streamlin- ing approval to field and creating a more agile environment that would address issues in real time. Each team played a critical role in getting us through the system-acceptance test (SAT). Teir func- tions were as follows:
• The SAT Lab: This team enabled participants to work through struc- tured user scenarios. Through the SAT Lab, the IPPS-A team received direct feedback from participants on what was working, what wasn’t, and what needed to be fixed. Participants looked at IPPS-A from an end-to-end perspec- tive and asked a critical question: “Can the system pass these scenarios?”
• The Dual Entry Cell: The Pennsylva- nia National Guard led this important team tasked with reworking the activi- ties conducted during the risk reduction event. The Dual Entry Cell facilitated more robust testing of IPPS-A’s business processes to identity key issues.
• The Policy, Processes and Proce- dures (P3) Cell: Led by the National Guard Bureau, participants of the P3
https://asc.ar my.mil 29
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
