1. Joint Command and Control Campaign Lead
The Challenge of Achieving Joint Command and Control in a Network Centric Environment
Frank J. Caravella
Raytheon Company
Joint Command and Control Campaign Lead
11/21/2018

2. Agenda Operational Context for Joint Command and Control
The Joint Command and Control Acquisition Environment
Govt and Industry challenges to the new acquisition environment
Summary / conclusions
11/21/2018

3. 21st Century Warfighting Environment
Full Spectrum Dominance
Exploit every source – leverage what we have
Provide shared situation awareness / understanding
Support dominant speed of command
Permit precise, synchronized execution
Allow agility and flexibility
Enabled By Network Centric Warfare
11/21/2018

4. Video
11/21/2018

5. Agenda Operational Context for Joint Command and Control
The Joint Command and Control Acquisition Environment
Govt and Industry challenges to the new acquisition environment
Summary / conclusions
11/21/2018

6. 21st Century Acquisition Environment
OIF LL: Seamless Joint Capability
“Old Think”
“New Think”
OIF lessons learned reinforce role of joint capabilities
OIF lessons learned portrayed expanding requirements for core joint capabilities at strategic, operational and tactical levels
Paradigm Shift to “Born Joint”
11/21/2018

7. Warfighting Capabilities JC2 and NCES Acquisitions Are Interdependent
Implementing Warfighting Capability In An Enterprise Services Architecture
JC2
Mission Capability Packages
Key warfighting applications for decision superiority
NCES
Common set of information services that provides for timely, ubiquitous edge user access to decision quality information within the Global Information Grid
Warfighting Capabilities
Pathfinders
&
Feeders
JC2 Transformational Acquisition:
Employ transformational evolutionary acquisition to speed delivery of advanced JC2 capabilities to users
Develop and field demonstrated technologies to warfighter while providing follow-on improvements in capability
Provide users time-phased increments of capabilities that are less than the full requirement as a trade-off for earlier delivery, affordability, and risk reduction
Product of an iterative process of concept innovation and experimentation … content determined by maturation of required technologies
Each increment will meet, as a minimum, the threshold requirements for each respective block of JC2 capabilities
JC2 and NCES Acquisitions Are Interdependent
11/21/2018

8. Possible Acquisition Structure* (Family of Programs with Joint PEO)
DRAFT
Structure: Dedicated Joint Program Executive Officer (PEO) with no central Joint Program Office (JPO) with overall responsibility. Component PMOs report to the Joint PEO, not the JPO. AE
JPO responsible for Business, Systems Engineering, Testing, Fielding, and Logistics/Life Cycle Sustainment.
Joint PEO
DISA
SAE
Comp Acq
RDT&E and Procurement
funding controlled by the Joint PEO for annual allocation to JPO and Component PMOs
JPO
DISA
SAE
PMO
Bus Mgmt
Integration & Testing
Lead Systems Engineering
Systems Engineering
Bus Mgmt
Option # 3: Family of Programs with Joint Program Executive Officer
Roles and Responsibilities and Relationships:
MDA:
Acquisition decisions and oversight
Joint PEO:
Reviews JPO and Component PMOs POM and budget submissions
Allocates RDT&E funds to JPO and Component PMOs
Allocates Procurement funds to JPO and Component PMOs
Allocates joint O&M funds to JPO and Component PMOs
Monitors budget execution
Reprioritizes and reallocates resources within execution year
Integrates acquisition activities across JPO and Component PMOs
Supervises Joint PM and Component PMs
JPO (Collaboratively with Component PMOs):
Leads collaborative team with Component PMOs
Develops overarching/integrated strategy and plans for:
Systems engineering
Test and evaluation
Logistics
Fielding
Training
Configuration management
Acquisition strategy (includes contracting & COTS)
System and technical architecture
Risk management
JPO (cont.)
Provides lead systems engineer
Provides integration and test environment
Performs end-to-end integration testing
Coordinates operational testing with OTA
Develops, tests, fields, and provides life-cycle sustainment for selected items
Executes JPO budget
Provides POM and budget input
 Component PMOs:
Collaboratively develops overarching/integrated strategy and plans with JPO for:
Systems engineering
Test and evaluation
Logistics
Fielding
Training
Configuration management
Acquisition strategy (includes contracting and COTS)
System and technical architecture
Risk management
Executes acquisition program for assigned items consistent with overarching/integrated strategy and plans
Develops, tests, and provides life-cycle sustainment for assigned items
Fields JC2 capabilities within Component
Develops training
Provides POM and budget inputs for JC2 program
Provides POM and budget inputs for Component O&M
Executes Component PMO budget
Fielding
Logistics#
Fielding#
Logistics
Component PMOs under Components for Administrative Support. Component PMOs lead functional areas and report to the Joint Program Executive Officer for program management. Component PMOs co-equals with the JPO
PdM
Product Mgrs
Product Mgrs
System Integration
Testing
# Overall Planning
11/21/2018
*=From OSD/NII
Note: Pre-Decisional Draft Information
This is one possible (probable) program office structure
How/where should acquisition offices be established?
By service?
By MCP?
What are some of the alternatives? How do these alternatives impact industry?

9. Agenda Operational Context for Joint Command and Control
The Joint Command and Control Acquisition Environment
Govt and Industry challenges to the new acquisition environment
Summary / conclusions
11/21/2018

10. Technical Challenges: Technical Environment
Performance
Evolution Environment
Standards
Listen
Experiment / Prototype
Baseline
Adapt
Build
Technology
Listen
Experiment / Prototype
Baseline
Adapt
Build
Ops Concept
Spiral 3
Narrow the spiral threads
Listen
Experiment / Prototype
Baseline
Adapt
Build
Technical Strategies
Spiral 2
Engineering Approach
Spiral 1
Time
11/21/2018

11. Technical Challenges: JC2 / NCES Technical Standards Gap
Desired Core Service Capability
C2 ERA, NOA, SOSCOE, NESI
Technical
Standard 1
Security
Gap Fillers TS 4 TS 9 TS 7 TS 3
OA / Architecture Backbone
Standards TS 6 TS 2 TS 5 TS 8
Capability Gaps
COI Preferences
(Could Be
Service Specific)
Development / Fielding in Parallel with Standards Evolution Creates Fiscal and Operational Risk
11/21/2018

12. Technical Challenges: Multiple Technical Approaches
Desired Core Service Capability
C2 ERA, NOA, SOSCOE, NESI
USN
NESI / NOA TS 1
USAF
C2 ERA
US Army
SOSCOE
OA / Architecture Backbone
Standards TS 5 TS 2 TS 4
Different TTPS
Terminology / Semantics
Programmatics
Carry Forward Legacy TS 3
Gap Filler Standards
Each Military Community is Trying to Fill Technical Standards Gaps
11/21/2018

13. Joint Service Interoperability Challenge
MCP-Defined Services
Ex (SA)
COI
Workflow
Service
Other COI Services
(Includes Military Service Differences)
Gap
Desired Core Service Capability
C2 ERA, NOA, SOSCOE, NESI
BEA WLI
Basic
Workflow
OA / DIB
Standards
Satisfying Core Enterprise Service Criteria
Does Not Assure COI Interoperability
11/21/2018

14. Joint Service Interoperability Challenge
Other COI Services
COI
Collaboration
Service
MCP-Defined Services
Ex (SA)
Army
Unique
Navy
Unique
USAF
Unique
USMC
Unique
Desired Core Service Capability
C2 ERA, NOA, SOSCOE, NESI
When Providing Operational COI Services,
All Stakeholders Must Be Considered
11/21/2018

15. Joint Service Interoperability Challenge
MCP-Defined Services
Ex (SA)
COI
Collaboration
Service
Army
Unique
Navy
USAF
USMC
Other COI Services
(Includes Military Service Differences)
Desired Core Service Capability
C2 ERA, NOA, SOSCOE, NESI
Providing Truly Joint Functional Services Requires
Addressing All Service-Unique Needs
11/21/2018

16. Acquisition Practices Challenges: Acquisition of Composable Capability
How do we reward innovation?
How to describe
and cost the
work flows?
How do we test?
Service
Consumer
Composed
Service A
Application
Web
Service B
Service C
Legacy
System
Data/
Content
External
App
Adapter
Denotes interface A B C
Who absorbs
cost of
development?
What are the roles of government and industry?
How do we measure success from users’ perspectives?
11/21/2018

17. Government Perspective Defense Industry Perspective
Business Case Challenges: Acquisition in an Open Architecture Environment
Benefits
Makes warfighting sense
Provides technical foundation for NCW
Facilitates interoperability
Facilitates non-proprietary solutions
Enables rapid response to change in requirements
Provides business opportunities as systems integrator
Challenges
Cross-service requirements definition
Joint acquisition strategy
Contracting rigidity
Leveraging commercial technologies, products, skills, and best practices for DoD enterprise outcomes
Integrator role
Government Perspective
OA is less expensive
Life cycle costs
Dynamic reuse
Non-proprietary
Re-invigorates competition
Defense Industry
Perspective
Business case is challenging
Less emphasis on production quantity
Cross-COI best of breed
First on-scene
Where’s the ROI?
OA Provides Both Opportunity And Risk
11/21/2018

18. Agenda Operational Context for Joint Command and Control
The Joint Command and Control Acquisition Environment
Govt and Industry challenges to the new acquisition environment
Summary / conclusions
11/21/2018

19. Roles Gov’t focus: Industry strengths: Gov’t / Industry partner in:
Cross-DoD requirements coordination
MCP requirements definition
COI work flow definition
Technical Standards selection
Budget priorities and discipline
Industry strengths:
Innovation
Engineering experience & discipline
Practical application of technology
DoD cross-customer technical solution coordination
Structured and organized for rapid capability delivery
Gov’t / Industry partner in:
Criteria for enterprise success
Innovative acquisition practices
User representation throughout development of capability
JC2 Development Will Involve Multiple
DoD Organizations And Multiple Industry Participants
11/21/2018

20. Bringing It All Together
ENVIRONMENT
Multiple players
Rapid acquisition and short development
Government expects spiral / incremental capability introduction
Complex technical issues
Limited resources – both money and personnel
WHAT WE NEED…
Government / Industry partnering from capability definition through experimentation, fielding, and lifecycle maintenance
Clearly defined roles and responsibilities
Close coordination between requirements identifiers and solution developers
Open and flexible technical solutions
Resource alignment
Need Clarity of Acquisition Environment
11/21/2018