Internal Information Services Risk Management Team Gay Infanti Northrop Grumman 8 February 2005

2 Agenda Review team core members/contributors and accomplishments of RM Working Group Review the RM working group’s conclusions/recommendations Recommend where we should go from here

3 Core Membership, RM Team #1 - Government David Bachman, Defense Acquisition University Ivan Bembers, NGA Gary Christle, Center for Naval Analysis James Gordon, NRO Jim Henderson, NAVAIR and NASA John Hogrebe, NAVAIR Dr. Steve Van Drew, NAVAIR Kathy Llewellyn, USN Deborah Tomsic, OUSD (AT&L)/ARA/AM Wilma Uribe, DCMA Headquarters

4 Core Membership, RM Team #1 - Industry Gay Infanti, Northrop Grumman, Team Leader Gene Adams, Northrop Grumman Corporation Wayne Abba, Abba Consulting Dick Coleman, Northrop Grumman Corporation John Driessnack, MCR Craig Peterson, The Mitre Corporation

5 Summary of Accomplishments Shared theories/best practices among the team and with NDIA PMSC Conducted survey to determine current state of process integration among industry and Government program management, business management, and risk management communities Results briefed at April 2004 NDIA PMSC Results also presented in three IPM conference workshops (Fall 2003, Spring and Fall 2004) Published paper summarizing results, conclusions, recommendations and a business case for change NDIA Website Acquisition Community Connection, Risk Management CoP, at _TOPIC _TOPIC

6 Conclusions Programs will benefit from the integration of RM with EVM While some PMs already integrate these processes, there are improvement opportunities There are many barriers to effective process integration that must first be overcome

7 The Business Case Spending a little extra on integrating processes and tools will save a lot in replanning and rework, which drive up product cost and extend program schedules Anticipated savings will also result from identification of opportunities, allowing management to take advantage of them to offset cost impacts and late deliveries Customer goodwill will increase as result of improved program visibility/insight, communications, and credibility (no surprises) Downside of non-integration would be: Management reserves insufficient to cover risks Budget and responsibility for risk handling not built into B/L Risks missed or incorrectly handled Risks, newly identified through the variance analysis process, not addressed in the RM process Risk reserves allocated without regard to severity of risk or, worse, for scope creep resulting in poor ROI Understated EACs

8 Recommendations Recommendations arising from team discussions and survey results fell into three categories: Training Policy Process Recommendations comprise a candidate list of topics for action by the RM working group during its next phase Follow-on team should develop its charter, for the next phase of this effort, from this candidate list and present it to the NDIA PMSC at a subsequent meeting

9 Training Training improvement required to overcome Barriers associated with lack of process maturity and lack of knowledge/skills needed to achieve process integration Perception that EVM is a financial tool, rather than a PM tool; when properly used EVM provides realistic information for management decision-making Training needed to improve understanding of the benefits available from RM and EVM integration Training curriculum should address both EVM and RM training, as core PM processes, and both should reside in the PM curriculum Training should also include techniques and tools for achieving process integration NDIA PMSC should consider partnering with DAU to cooperatively develop solutions in response to team recommendations

10 Policy Policy changes, along with implementing guidance will help remove several barriers to integration once benefits of policy-driven changes are realized Lack of management commitment Internal/external culture Emotional A candidate list of existing policies and guidelines that could be modified to address process integration, as well as potential new policy/guidance, is presented for potential consideration and action in further phases of this effort

11 Process A major barrier to process integration is organizational – RM and EVM usually have different process owners and different process champions Organizational boundaries must be overcome to achieve successful integration Recommend that NDIA PMSC, representing the EVM community, reach out and partner with other communities to create the demand for process integration through cross-functional cooperation

12 Proposed Next Steps NDIA PMSC establish a follow-on team (working group) while interest/momentum are high Sign up members for follow-on team - see next slide for those already committed to participate NDIA PMSC task the follow-on team to develop a charter, execution plan and schedule for the next phase of this effort and report to NDIA PMSC at Spring meeting NDIA continue to promote integrated program management through activities like this RM WG, e.g., chartering other process integration teams (cost estimating, system engineering, have been suggested)

13 Team #2 Membership Team #1 members who have already committed to membership in team #2 Gay Infanti, Northrop Grumman (Team Lead) Wayne Abba, Abba Consulting Gene Adams, Northrop Grumman Ivan Bembers, NGA Dick Coleman, Northrop Grumman John Driessnack, MCR (Co-Lead) Craig Peterson, MITRE and PMI Risk SIG Deborah Tomsic, OUSD (AT&L)/ARA/AM Wilma Uribe, HQ DCMA Dr. Steve Van Drew, NAVAIR Other members are needed; anyone else wishing to join the new team would be welcome and should contact Gay Infanti to sign up Phone: (714)