1 Performance-based Logistics Implementation Methods Peter R. Raymond Tom Parks Nancy Brandt March...

1

Performance-based LogisticsImplementation Methods

Peter R. Raymond

Tom Parks

Nancy Brandt

March 24, 2003

2

Workshop Agenda

Product Support and PBL in Depth

PBL Strategy Development

Alternative Development (Case Study Discussion)

Alternative Evaluation Method

PBL Lessons Learned

Question and Answer Session

3

Product Support Development

OSD policy support Product support reengineering Life cycle management policy PBL Guide

Program office PBL development

PRODUCT

SUPPORTPRODUCT

SUPPORT

Program Manager’s

Guide To

Buying Performance

4

The Need for PBL

Combatant Commanders need to project and sustain forces with a smaller logistics footprint

Program Managers need to improve readiness and compress the logistics chain

Military services need to reduce cycle times to industry standards

FY 2003-07 Quadrennial Defense Review Improve readiness for major weapon systems and commodities Compress supply chain by eliminating non-value added steps Reduce cycle time

FY 2003-07 Quadrennial Defense Review Improve readiness for major weapon systems and commodities Compress supply chain by eliminating non-value added steps Reduce cycle time

5

Today’s Product Support Environment

Annual weapon system sustainment cost is estimated at $62B Requirements process emphasizes weapon system

performance Limited attention to life cycle sustainment

Services implementing a variety of product support strategies

PMs responsible for life cycle management Limited sustainment expertise/guidance Flexibility to develop their own strategy

6

Product Support

Product support is a package of logistics support functions necessary to maintain the readiness and operational capability of a system or subsystem Covers all logistics elements

Program Managers are required to develop and document product support as part of their acquisition strategy

PBL is currently the leading product support strategy

7

CLS: Contractor Logistics SupportDVD: Direct Vendor DeliveryPBL: Performance-Based LogisticsTSPR: Total System Program Responsibility

Product Support Spectrum

Increasing supplier responsibilit

y/

Increasing supplier responsibilit

y/

Increasing Govt. risk

Increasing Govt. risk

ORGANIC SUPPORT

COMMERCIAL SUPPORT

Traditional TSPRCLSDVD

Increasing Govt. responsibilit

y/

Increasing Govt. responsibilit

y/

Decreasing Govt. risk

Decreasing Govt. risk

PBLPBLPBL PBL

PBL can fall anywhere along the spectrum

(PBL CLS)

8

PBL Characteristics

Centered on performance agreements between Warfighter and Program Manager Focused on system readiness and warfighter support Preserves warfighter resources: dollars and people Implemented and executed transparent to the warfighter

Responsive to the unique requirements of the military services

Managed by a Product Support Integrator who coordinates logistics support organizations across government and industry

Selects best-value providers from government, industry, or government/industry partnerships Product support agreement between program manager and product

support provider(s)

9

PBL Characteristics (Cont.)

Maintains long-term competitive pressures on government and industry providers

Relies on information systems across industry and government that enable: Comprehensive logistics chain integration Asset visibility Continuous improvement of weapon system support Continuous reduction in operating costs by dedicated

investments Technology insertion

10

• PBL uses a commercial or organic product support integrator to meet the warfighter’s performance requirements

• PBL should improve:• Technology insertion• Reliability• Product availability• Total cost• Inventory management• Obsolescence management

• PBL uses a commercial or organic product support integrator to meet the warfighter’s performance requirements

• PBL should improve:• Technology insertion• Reliability• Product availability• Total cost• Inventory management• Obsolescence management

PBL Principles

PBL must provide: Improved weapons system

support Reduced cost

11

PBL Transformation of Product Support

Mission Need

IdentifiedPM Selects

OEM E&MDFull Rate

Production IOC MSD

TraditionalIdeal Product Support Transformation

DoD-wide weapon system sustainment cost estimate

to be about $62B

DoD-wide weapon system sustainment cost estimate

to be about $62B

12

Advantages of PBL Early in the Program Life Cycle

Defines and optimizes the sustainment infrastructure

Influences system design

Purchase support as an integrated, affordable performance package

Optimize system readiness

PBL uses long-term performance agreements among receivers and providers of support

PBL uses long-term performance agreements among receivers and providers of support

13

Warfighter

Product Support Integrator

Program Manager

Performance-based Agreement

Contract or MOU

Contract or MOU

Product SupportProvider



PBL Support Participants and Arrangements

May be commercial or organic

source

May be commercial or organic sources

14

The Warfighter’s Role

Identify system-level performance requirements that reflect their needs

Provide data for measuring attainment of PBL performance metrics

Participate in performing quantitative and qualitative performance evaluations of support providers

Participate in periodic reviews of PBL strategy

Potential Challenges:

Identifying who represents the warfighter

Obtaining full participation from the warfighter

15

The Program Manager’s Role

Develop and document a product support strategy Have it address all the logistics functions Make it part of the program acquisition strategy

Negotiate a performance-based agreement that satisfies the warfighter’s needs

Develop a performance-based work statement for the product support integrator (PSI) Monitor the PSI’s performance

Update the product support strategy periodically At least every five years of the program’s life cycle

16

Principal PBL Documents

Product Support Strategy

Performance-based agreement (PBA)

Contracts for commercial providers

Memoranda of understanding (MOU) for organic providers

These documents contain:

Metrics, their data sources, and computation methods

Expected cost and performance outcomes

Performance incentives and sanctions

Risk management methods

17

PBL Development Process

Establish

PBL Team

Establish

Product

Support

Integrator

Develop

PBL Strategy

Draft

Warfighter

Performance

Agreement

Develop

Product

Support

Agreement

to Implement and Monitor Performance

Develop

Program

Metrics and

Baseline

(Performance and Cost)

Monitor

PSI

Performance

Review and

Update PBL

Strategy

18

PBL IPT

PBL Development IPT

IPT Outputs:

PBA SOW/SOO

BCA Contract/MOU

IPT Outputs:

PBA SOW/SOO

BCA Contract/MOU

CustomerTraining

Requirements/ICP

Physical Distribution

Maintenance Depot

Legal

Information Systems

Financial

Engineering

Contracting

OEM

Systems Command

PM

Competition concerns may

limit OEM participation

19

IPT Tasks

Focus on developing PBL strategy Work with all stakeholders early in the PBL

formulation process to ensure that core issues are addressed: Is the system core? What is core strategy? Is there DoD core logistics capability? What is the depot effect?

Address core compliance strategy in the justification and approval (J&A)

Initiate congressional notification as early as possible

20


Establish

PBL Team

Establish

Product

Support

Integrator

Develop

PBL Strategy

Draft

Warfighter

Performance

Agreement

Develop

Product

Support

Agreement


Develop

Program

Metrics and

Baseline


Monitor

PSI

Performance

Review and

Update PBL

Strategy

21

Key Objectives of a PBL Strategy

Achieve warfighter-focused performance goals Develop the metrics and data sources for

measuring performance

Assign life cycle support responsibilities

Identify product support integrators and providers

Provide incentives support providers to attain warfighter goals

Developing a PBL strategy is an evolutionary process Developing a PBL strategy is an evolutionary process

22

PBL Strategy Development Process

Assess the ProgramAssess the Program

Develop Evaluation CriteriaDevelop Evaluation Criteria Develop Product Support Alternatives

Develop Product Support Alternatives

Assign EvaluationCriteria Weights

Assign EvaluationCriteria Weights Evaluate Alternatives (Qualitative)Evaluate Alternatives (Qualitative)

Evaluate Alternatives (Quantitative)Evaluate Alternatives (Quantitative)

Combine Alternative ScoresCombine Alternative Scores

Select AlternativeSelect Alternative

Conduct Business Case

Analysis

Conduct Business Case

Analysis

23

PBL Strategy Development Process Overview

Use expert opinion from a range of acquisition and support competencies

Compare alternatives against qualitative and quantitative criteria

Assess alternatives using criteria established and weighted by the program office and key stakeholders

Assess sensitivity to individual measures

24

PBL Pair-wise Comparison

PBL StrategyPBL Strategy

Criterion 1Criterion 1

Alt. 3Alt. 3 Alt. 4Alt. 4








25

Assess the ProgramAssess the Program

26

Program Assessment Areas

Criteria Definition

Life Cycle Stage Assess the program’s life cycle and the potential benefits associated with implementing PBL

DoD Infrastructure

(Organic Base)

Assess the effect of PBL solutions on DoD infrastructure (maintenance depots, inventory control points, and distribution depots)

Commercial Base Evaluate the ability of the commercial base to successfully implement a PBL strategy

Acquisition Strategy Identify the programmatic risks associated with implementing PBL into the acquisition program

System Design Identify how the system’s design affects the benefits and risks of PBL

Technology Estimate how PBL will preserve or advance the system’s technology

27

Life Cycle Stage(DoD 5000 Model)

Concept

Refinement

Technology

Development

Production &

Deployment

System Development

& Demonstration

Operations &

Support

ConceptRefinement

Decision

CriticalDesignReview

FRPDecisionReview

Pre-Systems Acquisition Systems Acquisition Sustainment

ICD: Initial Capabilities Document

CDD: Capabilities Development Document

CPD: Capabilities Production Document

IOC: Initial Operating Capability

FOC: Full Operating Capability

LRIP: Low-Rate Initial Production

OT&E: Operational Test and Evaluation

FRP: Full Rate Production

ICD CPDCDD

A CB

User Needs &Technology Opportunities

• Process entry at Milestones A, B, or C

• Entrance criteria met before entering phase

• Evolutionary Acquisition or Single Step to Full Capability

Systems Acquisition

28

PBL Candidate Selection

ACAT I, II, and new start programs

Obsolescence Challenges

Low Reliability

Poor Availability

High Cost/High Demand

Use Cost Performance

Matrix

Use Cost Performance

Matrix

29

High Performance/

High Cost

Systems

High Performance/

Low Cost

Systems

Low Performance/

Low Cost

Systems

Low Performance/

High Cost

Systems

Low Performance/

High Cost

Systems

Performance

Co

st

Lo

wH

igh

Good Poor

Cost-Performance Matrix

Performance Index = Reliability and Supportability

Lo

gis

tics

Co

st

Ind

exTarget poorly performing systemsTarget poorly performing systems

30

Core Logistics Capability(10USC § 2464)

Requires DoD to maintain a government-owned and operated core logistics capability (CLC) Includes government personnel, equipment , and facilities

SECDEF identifies CLC and workload required to maintain those capabilities

CLC must include capabilities necessary to maintain and repair weapon systems and other military equipment identified to fulfill JCS strategic and contingency plans (including establishing organic depot capability NLT 4-years after IOC)

SECDEF assigns government-owned, operated facilities sufficient workload to ensure cost efficiency and technical competence in peacetime while preserving surge capacity and reconstitution to support strategic and contingency plans

“The CLC Rule” -- DoD must have core logistics capability“The CLC Rule” -- DoD must have core logistics capability

31

Core Logistics Capability (Cont.)(10USC § 2464)

SECDEF notifies congress, with justification, the first time a weapon system/equipment is determined to be a commercial item for the purposes of exception to core

EXCLUDES: Systems and equipment under special access programs Nuclear aircraft carriers Commercial items

PROHIBITS: Non-Government activities from performing core workload

AUTHORIZES: SECDEF waiver, with Congressional notice, if SECDEF determines workload is no longer required for national defense reasons

32

50/50 Rule(10USC § 2466)

No more than 50% of a military department’s depot-level maintenance and repair workload funds in a fiscal year can be applied to non-federal government work

DoD civilian employees involved in the depot-level maintenance and repair must be managed on the basis of available workload and funds, not on the basis of end-strength

Service Secretaries may waive this limitation for a particular fiscal year with Congressional notice and a determination that waiver is needed for reasons of National security

The “50/50 Rule” -- Applied at the military service levelThe “50/50 Rule” -- Applied at the military service level

33

Requires competitive contracts for transfers of DoD depot-level workload >$3MRequires competitive contracts for transfers of DoD depot-level workload >$3M

Competitive Workload Transfers(10USC § 2469)

Competition required to move >$3M annual organic, depot-level workload to the private sector

Merit-based procedures are required to move >$3M annual depot-level workload from one DoD depot to another DoD depot

$3M threshold includes the cost of labor and materials for work performed by a DoD depot-level activity

OMB Circular A-76 does not apply

34

Congressional Outsourcing Notification

Congressional outsourcing notification must address: The competitive procedures used to award the

contract The cost/benefit analysis demonstrating savings Conformance with 10 USC 2466 (50/50 rule) Conformance with 10 USC 2464 (CLC requirement)

P. L. 105-261 Sec. 346 as amended by P. L. 106-65 Sec. 336 (from FY99 & FY00 DoD Authorization Acts)P. L. 105-261 Sec. 346 as amended by P. L. 106-65 Sec. 336 (from FY99 & FY00 DoD Authorization Acts)

35

Develop ProductSupport Alternatives

Develop ProductSupport Alternatives

36

Agenda

Process Overview

Product Support Alternatives Matrix

Notional Case Study

37

Process Overview

Consider system characteristics Readiness drivers Sustainability drivers Life cycle phase Architecture Acquisition strategy DoD & Industry Infrastructure Intended operational use Operational environment Existing or mandated programmatic and operational constraints

Consider the range of logistics elements appropriate for the client’s product support needs

38

Process Overview(con’t)

Develop alternatives that have significant differences Define constraints and assumptions Start with opposite ends of the support spectrum and work

towards the middle Leverage/consider successful support strategies used in other

programs Develop general support concepts first, then flesh out

specifics for each logistics element (iterative process) Record data in matrix format (e.g., Excel spreadsheet) Describe specific support option for each logistics element

within each support alternative Identify advantages, disadvantages, enablers, and mitigators

for each alternative

Critical element for evaluating/ranking alternatives

39

Product Support AlternativesMatrix: Basic Template

Hardware

Maintenance

Software

Maintenance

Spares Support

Configuration Management

Training ……

Full ContractorLogistics Support

Contractor - Organizational

LogisticsSupport Mix

Full Organizational

LogisticsSupport

Logistics Elements

Pro

du

ct S

up

po

rt S

pec

tru

m

(Co

ntr

acto

r to

Org

anic

Su

pp

ort

)

40

Product Support Alternatives Matrix

41

Nomenclature Section

42

Product Support Alternatives Matrix: ILS Elements Section

43

ILS Elements Section

44

Product Support Alternatives Matrix: Qualitative Assessment Section

45

Qualitative Assessment Section

46

Developing Product SupportAlternatives:

Notional Case Study

Developing Product SupportAlternatives:

Notional Case Study

47

Developing Alternatives

1. Consider system characteristics

2. Define constraints and assumptions

3. Develop “general” product support alternatives

4. Consider the range of logistics elements

1. Maintenance Alternatives

2. Supply Support Alternatives

3. …….etc

5. Identify advantages, disadvantages, enablers, and mitigators for each alternative

6. Refine product support alternatives

48

System X Characteristics

Successful Navy ACTD that is being installed via rapid acquisition program – adapted from existing DoD (non-Navy) system Full contractor logistics support (CLS) using field service

representatives (FSRs) on-board each System-X equipped ship OEM provides operator training (“buttonology”) Navy provides tactical training

Aggressive installation schedule (12 – 15 installs per year); total population undefined (6 – 160)

System is open architecture, largely COTS hardware and software

Few parts in DoD supply system

49








3. …….etc



50

Constraints

Acquisition Support Strategy requires: Two-level maintenance concept; on-equipment maintenance

(O-level) concept is remove-and-replace Off-equipment (D-level) maintenance performed by contractor Basic operator (‘buttonology’) training provided by contractor

and USN USN will develop operational tactics and provide associated

training

51

Assumptions

Total number of System X 71 Each System X & mini-System X will have one

dedicated maintainer onboard ship when deployed When FSR/”Super-Tech” does not physically reside

with BG/ARG, maintainers will require higher skill levels

System configuration/capability will continue evolving rapidly because of COTS HW/SW lifecycles and multi-service user environment

FSR = Contractor Field Service Rep

Super Tech = E-6 - E-9 with FSR-equivalent training & skills

BG/ARG = Battle Group/Amphibious Ready Group

52








3. …….etc



53

Product Support Alternatives

Contractor Logistics Support (CLS)

Organic Logistics Support (OLS)

– Full-service support contractor– Partial CLS (contractor as integrator)

– Partial OLS (government as integrator)– Full OLS (USN only) – Full OLS (DoD – cross service)

54








3. …….etc



55

Maintenance Alternatives

• Contractor Logistics Support (CLS)

• Organic Logistics Support (OLS)

– FSR maintenance

– FSR on-site support (one FSR per BG/ARG)

– Tele-FSR assistance

56

CLS Maintenance

57

Maintenance Alternatives

• Contractor Logistics Support (CLS)

• Organic Logistics Support (OLS)

– FSR maintenance

– FSR on-site support (one FSR per BG/ARG)

– Tele-FSR assistance

– Tele-“GS -Tech” assistance

– Tele-“Super-Tech” assistance

– “Super-Tech” on-site support (one S-Tech per BG/ARG)

– “Super-Tech” maintenance

58

OLS Maintenance

59








3. …….etc



60

CLS Alternatives:Supply Support & Transportation

61

CLS Alternatives:Maintenance Training & Documents

62

System XProduct Support Alternatives Matrix

Key

Blue = Contractor functions

Yellow = Organic functions

Green = Mixed functions

Brown = Assumptions & constraints

63








3. …….etc



64

Full CLS: Advantages, Disadvantages, Enablers, Mitigators

65








3. …….etc



66

Refining Product Support Alternatives

Conduct evaluation/review Convene panel of in-house ILS experts (cross disciplines

and cross service is best) Conduct pair-wise comparison of alternatives

Fill in details and modify support alternatives as necessary

Conduct evaluation/review with Service Representatives Convene panel of selected Program Management Office,

Fleet, product support representatives Conduct pair-wise comparison of alternatives

Modify support alternatives as necessary

67

Develop Evaluation CriteriaDevelop Evaluation Criteria

68

Potential Evaluation Criteria

Qualitative Factors: Sustainability Readiness Modernization

Quantitative Factor: Cost – business case analysis

69

Sustainability(Wartime Risk Reduction)

Maintainability: Ability to keep system operating - repair of hardware and software failures, faults, and anomalies

Mobilization: Ease of moving logistics support supplies and personnel to foreign nations and/or ships at sea

Surge: Maintenance capacity, supply capacity, stability of logistics workforce

70

Readiness(Peacetime Risk Reduction)

Stability and capability of maintenance organizations and workforce

Ability to respond to OPTEMPO changes

Ability to respond to requirements changes/demands through technology investments

Ability to respond to obsolescence and diminishing sources

71

Modernization(Technology Preservation)

Ability to yield performance or support improvements through technology investments

Ability to reduce need for future government R&D investment

Ability to maintain system’s technological capability

72

Cost

Acquisition Training and training equipment Technical data Technical manuals ICS (interim contractor support) Interim spares

Operations and support Maintenance – hardware and software CLS (contractor logistics support) Train government personnel Supply support (contractor and/or government) Training facilities, equipment, courses

73

Weight Criteria

How important is each criterion?

How important is each criterion?

CostCost

ModernizationModernization

SustainabilitySustainability

ReadinessReadiness

74

Weighting the Criteria

Stakeholders and program office identify relative importance of evaluation criteria

Assign a weight to each criterion to identify its relative importance to the decisionCompare relative importance or preference of

each criterion with respect to another criterion (pairwise comparison)

75

Ranking and Weighting Method(Notional Example)

Criteria Rank Weight

Sustainability 4

Cost 3

Readiness 2

Modernization 1

Rank on a scale from 1- 4 (low to high)

Weight each choice over the lowest ranked item

76

Pairwise Comparison Scale

Intensity Scale Explanation

1 Two activities contribute equally

3 One activity is slightly favored over another

5 One activity is strongly favored over another

7 An activity is favored very strongly over another

9 An activity is favored to be extremely important over another

2, 4, 6, 8 For compromise values

77

Ranking and Weighting Method(Notional Example)

Criteria Rank Weight

Sustainability 4 .36

Cost 3 .27

Readiness 2 .21

Modernization 1 .16

Rank on a scale from 1- 4 (low to high)

Weight each choice over the lowest ranked item

78

Evaluate Logistics Alternatives(Qualitative)

Evaluate Logistics Alternatives(Qualitative)

79

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Analytic Hierarchy Process (pair-wise comparison) Method for performing multiple-criteria decision-making Information decomposed into a hierarchy of criteria and alternatives LMI uses software tools such as ExpertChoice® and DecideRight®

PBL AHP decision elements Decision goal: PBL Strategy Decision criteria: Sustainability, Readiness, Modernization Decision alternatives: Full CLS, Mix of CLS and OLS, Full OLS

Perform Pair-wise comparisons of alternatives Compare relative importance of one alternative against another with

respect to each criteria In reference to a specific criteria, decide which alternative is more

important and how much more important

80

Ranking and Weighting Method

Qualitative Criteria: Assessed using expert opinion

Qualitative Criteria: Assessed using expert opinion

Quantitative Criteria:

Assessed using business case

analysis

Quantitative Criteria:

Assessed using business case

analysis

Sustainability(.36)

Readiness(.21)

Modernization(.16)

Cost(.27)

Select the Best Alternative(Combined Qualitative and Quantitative

Score)

Alternative 1..

Alternative 4

Alternative 1..

Alternative 4

Alternative 1..

Alternative 4

Alternative 1..

Alternative 4

WeightedOutcomesWeightedOutcomes

Alternative 1..

Alternative 4

Alternative 1..

Alternative 4

+ + + =

81

Weighted Scores(All Qualitative Measures)

0.59

0.26

0.12

0.12

0.20

0.27

0.41

6 - OLS – “Super-Tech” maintenance

5 - OLS – “Super-Tech” on-site support

4B - OLS – tele-“Super-Tech” support

4A - OLS – tele-“GS-Tech” support

3A - Partial CLS – tele-FSR support

2 - Partial CLS – FSR on-site support

1 - Full CLS – FSR maintenance

82

Evaluate Logistics Alternatives(Quantitative)

Evaluate Logistics Alternatives(Quantitative)

83

Business Case Analysis (Quantitative Analysis)

Limit evaluation to top alternatives, probably no more than three or four

Measure only relevant costs If all alternatives incur a similar cost, don’t bother

measuring it Sunk costs are irrelevant

Quantify the uncertainty associated with costs and benefits, if possible Measure effects across a range of risk

84

Business Case Analysis(Minimum Data Requirements)

Assumptions and Methods Scope of analysis – product support alternatives evaluated Assumptions Metrics

BCA Model Cost Benefits Analytical method – NPV Non-financial benefits – from qualitative analysis

Conclusions Recommendations

85

Combine Alternative Scores/Select PBL Alternative

Combine Alternative Scores/Select PBL Alternative

86

0.83

0.53

0.51

0.52

6 - OLS – “Super- Tech” maintenance

5 - OLS – “Super-Tech” on-site support

2 - Partial CLS – FSR on-site support

1 - Full CLS – FSR maintenance

Notional Weighting Scores(All Measures)

Highest ranked alternative - Develop an execution plan that exploits strengths and manages risk

Highest ranked alternative - Develop an execution plan that exploits strengths and manages risk

87


Establish

PBL Team

Establish

Product

Support

Integrator

Develop

PBL Strategy

Draft

Warfighter

Performance

Agreement

Develop

Product

Support

Agreement


Develop

Program

Metrics and

Baseline


Monitor

PSI

Performance

Review and

Update PBL

Strategy

Identify measurable,warfighter performance

requirements and metrics

Using Performance-Base Agreements

Support Provider Force Provider

Weapon SystemManagement

Cost and Risk Decisions Affecting the Life Cycle

Acquisition

Translate warfighter requirements into

optimumsustainment

DisposalSustainment

Industry and OrganicBuy

performanceas a package

(Include surge and flexibility)

PBAPSA

PM

89

PBA Contents

Outline the program’s PBL Strategy Recognize Warfighter and Program Manager roles and

responsibilities Specify critical readiness and sustainability drivers Identify warfighter performance metrics

Constraints and assumptions Computation methods Data sources Measurement frequency

Delineate methods for reviewing and updating performance requirements

90

Metrics

Measurement is important Key to performance improvement Identify problems in advance of crisis

Metrics should be Understandable Economical Field tested Highly-leveraged Timely Improvement-oriented Applied to all life cycle phases Useful at multiple levels

91

Recommendations for Selecting Metrics

Tie metrics to risk and problem areas

Only as good as underlying data

May evolve with program

Use multiple metrics

Do not measure everything Some metrics are universal Some are program-unique

92

Metrics Examples

Performance: Time free of casualty reports Response time – number of hours required to resolve a

CASREP/IPG-1 Percent of total installations and modifications that begin with

a complete and fully integrated installation package

Cost: Maintenance labor hours expended per total operating hours

Planned and corrective maintenance

93

Baseline Current Process

Determine status of: Resources: personnel and operating budgets Data availability, timeliness, and accuracy Performance by each metric Validate metric computation methods

Compare to cost and performance goals

94


Establish

PBL Team

Establish

Product

Support

Integrator

Develop

PBL Strategy

Draft

Warfighter

Performance

Agreement

Develop

Product

Support

Agreement


Develop

Program

Metrics and

Baseline


Monitor

PSI

Performance

Review and

Update PBL

Strategy

95

Product Support Agreements (PSAs)

PSAs are contractual agreements* between the PM or the PSI and the product support providers Define the output performance goals that support the PBL

agreement with the warfighter Identify the desired outcome in terms of objectives and

thresholds Set a target price for a set level of PBL capability and

performance Delineate any constraints or boundary conditions Include specific terms and conditions related to warfighter-

provided items such as physical space for maintenance and information about the quality of the weapon system

* Contracts for the private sector and MOU’s for the public sector

96


Establish

PBL Team

Establish

Product

Support

Integrator

Develop

PBL Strategy

Draft

Warfighter

Performance

Agreement

Develop

Product

Support

Agreement


Develop

Program

Metrics and

Baseline


Monitor

PSI

Performance

Review and

Update PBL

Strategy

97

The Product Support Integrator’s (PSI) Role

Product support integration is a key element of PBL The PSI is the single point of contact for numerous

organizational entities

Because product support is accomplished by numerous organizational entities, PSI coordination activities can include: Organic organizations Private sector providers Organic and private sector providers organized in a

partnership

98

The PSI Role (Cont.)

The PSI manages, directs, and controls requirements and processes using an integrated product development and total system approach

Most likely candidates for PSI are: System’s OEM or prime contractor Military service product or logistics command Private sector 3rd party logistics provider PM’s own logistics organization

Process for selecting the PSI will vary greatly depending upon commercial and organic capability, nature of the system, and maturity of the program

99


Establish

PBL Team

Establish

Product

Support

Integrator

Develop

PBL Strategy

Draft

Warfighter

Performance

Agreement

Develop

Product

Support

Agreement


Develop

Program

Metrics and

Baseline


Monitor

PSI

Performance

Review and

Update PBL

Strategy

100

Monitor PSI Performance

Monitor metrics

Identify and validate exceptions

Monitor risk management Surge capability Integration and supplier alliances

Assess rewards and penalties Warfighter role

101


Establish

PBL Team

Establish

Product

Support

Integrator

Develop

PBL Strategy

Draft

Warfighter

Performance

Agreement

Develop

Product

Support

Agreement


Develop

Program

Metrics and

Baseline


Monitor

PSI

Performance

Review and

Update PBL

Strategy

102

Review and Update PBL Strategy

PBL is tailored for each program

Plan on regularly updating

103

Lessons Learned

Early engagement of the warfighter is essential The Program Office has to work to cultivate warfighter

participation

Other IPT participants provide valuable, complementary perspectives

Selection of criteria and weighting is essential to the outcome

Avoid developing differences without distinctions

Plan on many iterations in the process of refining the outcome

104

Back Up Slides

105

Logistics Elements

Maintenance planning Computer resources support Technical data Supply support Training Support equipment Facilities Manpower and personnel Packaging, handling, shipping, and transportation Design interface

106


Pare down possible alternatives to a reasonable set

Don’t create distinctions without a difference

For each alternative, identify major advantages and disadvantages Identify methods for exploiting advantages and

mitigating disadvantages

1 Performance-based Logistics Implementation Methods Peter R. Raymond Tom Parks Nancy Brandt March...

Documents

Transcript of 1 Performance-based Logistics Implementation Methods Peter R. Raymond Tom Parks Nancy Brandt March...