CS-1 6/17/2015 1 6/17/2015 Towards a Work Breakdown Structure for Net Centric System of Systems...
-
date post
20-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
2
Transcript of CS-1 6/17/2015 1 6/17/2015 Towards a Work Breakdown Structure for Net Centric System of Systems...
CS-104/18/23
104/18/23
Towards a Work Breakdown Structure
for Net Centric System of Systems Engineering and Management
20th International Forum on COCOCMOWorkshop
October 2005
Gan WangGan Wang [email protected] Ricardo ValerdiRicardo Valerdi [email protected]
Jo Ann LaneJo Ann Lane [email protected] Barry BoehmBarry Boehm [email protected]
204/18/23
Outline
Background, motivation, goals and scope− Relevant needs and trends in SoS system engineering and management− Development objectives
Basic foundations for the SoS WBS− Product-oriented structure− Scalable Spiral Model − Three-team construct
Net centric System of Systems (SoS) Program Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
Implications and anticipated benefits Conclusions
304/18/23
Background
Systems engineering needs and trends− Increasing focus on capability-based acquisition− Increasing focus on user/value− Increasing complex systems of systems
• Disproportional increase in complexity and interdependency• Disproportional increase in needs for interoperability
− Increasing COTS, Open Source, reuse, and legacy integration New challenges in systems engineering and program management
− Evolutionary, rather than revolutionary− Capability, rather than functionality− Lifecycle perspective, rather than acquisition focused− Heterogeneous, rather than homogeneous− Negotiation, rather than mandate
404/18/23
Motivation for Net Centric SoS WBS
A step into continuing understanding of net centric SoS systems engineering and management− What is common, what is different?− New scopes and emphases
• Beyond traditional systems engineering considerations• Emerging behaviors and risk from evolutional process
− What is/belongs, what is/does not?− What works, what does not?
Time to step back and rethink− Systematic− Holistic− Mission and capability focused
New Perspective Required for Net Centric SoS/FoSNew Perspective Required for Net Centric SoS/FoS
504/18/23
Motivation (cont.)
No standard or commonly-accepted WBS above system level− Traditional program/project management focuses on system and
performance• Build-to-spec, requirement-driven, waterfall-ish
− Existing WBS constructs are system development focused – difficult to scale upward
• Development/acquisition centric, little attention to O&M • Interpretabilities and independencies disregarded• Enterprise context absent
Tool needed for integrated systems engineering and program management in net centric SoS programs
− Facilitates the unification of SoS SE and PM− Emerging systems engineering method: Capability Planning
Basis for cost estimating
604/18/23
Net Centric SoS WBS Goals
Provide− Standardized, yet flexible, prototypical WBS for net centric SoS engineering
and management programs – a standard template to develop program-specific WBS
− Reference model for SoS program management, systems engineering and cost estimating
− Full SoS life cycle “cradle-to-grave” perspective and support− Systematic and holistic approach− Basic analysis framework for decision making− Clear, consistent and commonly accepted terminology definition− Tailorable and adaptable model
704/18/23
Goals (cont.)
Integrate community-accepted best practices− General systems engineering and program management lifecycle− System-level WBS − Program and practice examples− Existing international standards
• ISO/IEC 15288: Systems Engineering – System Life Cycle Processes• DoD 5000.2: Operation of the Defense Acquisition System• ANSI/EIA 632 Processes for Engineering a System• MIL-HDBK-881: Work Breakdown Structure
Leverage leading development in net centric SoS systems engineering and processes, e.g.,− Spiral development model− Capability-based acquisition− Capability planning and investment analysis practices
804/18/23
Net Centric SoS WBS Scope
Target SoS/FoS type programs− With the charter to evolve mission capabilities of a SoS/FoS− Prototypical program lifecycle perspective
Consider− Program management and the supporting enterprise functions− Systems engineering and integration products− Development and O&M environments− Governance model
Capture three basic components of the SoS engineering and management practices− Systems
• Components and relationships• Infrastructure
− Processes• Program management• Systems engineering & integration• Technology development• Operations and support
− People• Management and acquisition authorities• Teams• Stakeholder community
904/18/23
Outline
Background, motivation, goals and scope− Relevant needs and trends in SoS system engineering and management− Development objectives
Basic foundations for the SoS WBS− Product-oriented structure− Scalable Spiral Model − Three-team construct
Net centric System of Systems (SoS) Program Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) – Top-level View
Anticipated benefits and conclusions
1004/18/23
Product-oriented Work Breakdown Structure− “Product”: physical entity, organization, function/service− Processes and activities associated with products
Scalable Spiral Process Model− Risk-driven OODA loops
Three-team execution model− Plan-driven team− IV&V team− Agile Rebaselining Team
Basic Foundations of SoS WBS
1104/18/23
Emerging Scalable Spiral Process
Decide on next-cycle capabilities, architecture upgrades, plans
• Stable specifications, COTS upgrades
• Development, integration, V&V, risk management plans
• Feasibility rationale
Act on plans, specifications
• Keep development stabilized
• Change impact analysis, preparation for next cycle (mini-OODA loop)
Orient with respect to stakeholders priorities, feasibility, risks
• Risk/Opportunity analysis
• Business case/mission analysis
• Prototypes, models, simulations
Observe new/updated objectives, constraints, alternatives
• Usage monitoring
• Competition, technology, marketplace ISR
Operate as current system
Accept new system
Source: USC-CSE
Life Cycle Architecture Milestone for Cycle
1204/18/23
Spiral Bravo
Three-Team Execution Model
Plan-Driven Team IV&V Team
Environment Change
Factors
Internal Change Factors
Agile Team
Agile Team
Spiral Charlie
RequirementsKPPsArchitecture Baseline
RequirementsKPPsArchitecture Baseline
RequirementsKPPsArchitecture Baseline
1. Plan-Driven Team
2. IV&V Team
3. Agile Rebaselining Team
• Emerging technologies• New threats• Operational environment changes…
• Requirement creeps• Emerging applications• Unforeseen complexities…
SoS Evolutionary Spirals
Spiral Alpha
Time
1304/18/23
Outline
Background, motivation and goals− Relevant needs and trends in SoS system engineering and management− Development objectives
Basic foundations for the SoS WBS− Product-oriented structure− Scalable Spiral Model − Three-team construct
Net centric System of Systems (SoS) Program Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
Implications and anticipated benefits Conclusions
1404/18/23
SoS Program WBS
The SoS Program
The SoS in Operation
Spiral Alpha Spiral Bravo Spiral Charlie Program Office
Plan-Driven Team
IV&V Team
Agile TeamAgile Team
Lev
el 0
Lev
el 1
Development
1504/18/23
The SoS Program WBS (cont.)
The SoS in Operation: consists of legacy systems, current operational organizations, “as-is” doctrine and CONOPS
− Important in understanding the baseline “as-is” architecture and business case analysis
Spiral Alpha: current development increment executed by the Plan-Driven Team, with relative stable capability objectives, requirements, architecture baseline, and clear deliverables
Spiral Bravo: next development increment in planning by the Agile Rebaselining Team; new baseline based on near- to mid-term capabilities needs, priorities and new technologies in test labs
Spiral Charlie: future development increment in planning by the Agile Rebaselining Team; new baseline based on future capability needs, priorities and emerging technologies
Program Office: the supporting enterprise with a mission and resources to accomplish the mission
− Three teams under it− Enterprise-level/(DoD) DOTMLPF support
1604/18/23
The SoS in Operation – the Legacy
The SoS in Operation
Operational Plans
Operational Organizations
Member Systems
Peer Systems
Communications Infrastructure
Operational Maintenance &
SupportOperational
Facilities
Operational Doctrine
Operational Architecture
Operational Processes
Resources and Budgets
Subplans
Organization 1
Organization 2
…
Organization k
System 1
System 2
…
System n
Peer System 1
Peer System 2
…
Peer System p
Site 1
Site 2
…
Site m
Support Centers
Support Organizations
Training Services
Logistics Depots
Maintenance Services
Data Centers
Networks
Processes & Procedures
Lev
el 1
Lev
el 2
Lev
el 3
1704/18/23
The SoS in Operation – Dealing With Legacy
Operations & Maintenance (O&M) centric Coping with “as-is” architecture, capability and interoperability
− Inconsistent doctrine, processes− Different CONOPS− Partial interoperability− Ad hoc communications protocols− Gaps and overlaps in functionality
Adapt to emerging behaviors (trial and error, “learning the rope”) Typically managed by different program offices or service organizations Source for new capability needs and acquisition requirements Baseline for business case analysis, e.g., ROI
1804/18/23
Spiral Alpha – Current Development Increment
The SoS Version Alpha
Phase/Spiral Plan
Operational Requirements
The Capability Model
Peer Systems
Member Systems
Lifecycle Support Systems
Communications Infrastructure
Spiral Alpha
Operational Plans & Processes
Systems
Operational Organizations
Operational Facilities
Training Functions
The Integrated and Verified SoS
The Validated SoS
The Deployed SoS
Mission Objectives & Constraints
Proposal
The WBS
Resource & Budgets
Estimates
Integrated Master Plan & Schedule
Subplans
Performance, Cost, and Schedule Objectives & Thresholds
Requirements by Type
CONOPS
Operational Architecture Baseline
Functional Allocation & Synthesis Products
Key Performance Parameters
M&S & Analysis Models
System 1
…
System n
Retired System n+1
…
Retired System n+k
Peer System 1
…
Peer System p
System 1
…
System s
Existing Infrastructure
Added Infrastructure
Plan-Driven Team
IV&V Team
Requirements, Plan & Processes
Integration, Assembly, Test & Checkout Systems
Integration Labs & Test Facilities
Systems to be Integrated
PersonnelRequirements, Plan & Processes
Operational Test & Evaluation Systems
Integration Labs & Test Facilities
Validation Data
Personnel
Lev
el 1
Lev
el 2
Lev
el 3
1904/18/23
Spiral Alpha (cont.)
Responsible by the Plan-Driven Team; verified and validated by the IV&V Team
Relative stable requirements and delivery goals Development/acquisition objective: operational capability Development methodology predominantly focused on function allocation
and synthesis (integration)− Rather than performance-driven at the system level
Increasing emphasis on COTS systems integration More waterfall like development model Post-Milestone A/pre-MS B (DoD 5000) entry typically The delivery becomes the new “as-is” SoS in Operation
2004/18/23
Single System
The System
The System Plan
System Requirements
The System Design
The Integrated and Verified
System
The Subsystems
The Operational System
The Validated System
Subsystems 1 Subsystems i Subsystems n… …
Maintenance & Support Systems
Operational Personnel (dedicated)
Operational Facility (dedicated)
Manuals & Procedures
Operational Data
Support Systems
Training Function
Support Personnel (dedicated)
Support Facility (dedicated)
Maintenance & Spares
• Modified version of Ruskin’s model
• Lifecycle orientation and O&M extensions
• Prototypical system WBS for any of the systems in the SoS
• Modified version of Ruskin’s model
• Lifecycle orientation and O&M extensions
• Prototypical system WBS for any of the systems in the SoS
Lev
el 3
Lev
el 4
Lev
el 5
2104/18/23
Spirals Bravo and Charlie
Phase/Spiral Plan
Operational Requirements
The Capability Model
Mission Objectives and Constraints
The WBS
Resource & Budgets
Estimates
Subplans
Prioritized Performance, Cost, and Schedule Objectives
Prioritized Requirements by Type
CONOPS
Operational Architecture Baseline
Functional Allocation & Synthesis Products
Key Performance Parameters
M&S & Analysis Models
Agile Team The SoS Version Bravo (Charlie) Baseline
Spiral Bravo (Charlie)
Lev
el 1
Lev
el 2
Lev
el 3
2204/18/23
Spirals Bravo and Charlie (cont.)
Principal deliverables are capability and architecture models Principal responsibility of the Agile Team
− Working independently from the Plan-Driven Team− May take on the overall SE&I role for the program
Lifecycle perspective for evolution Focused on prioritization of future capability increments Primary repository of future/postponed capability needs and
requirements for acquisition Primary drivers for future capability needs:
− Changing user needs− Changing environment or threats− Emerging technologies− Budget and resource constraints− Lessons Learned
Pre-concept phase or pre-Milestone A activities typically Basis for future Spiral Alpha WBS
2304/18/23
Program Office – The Supporting Enterprise
The Program Office
The Program Mission
Capability Models
SubofficesThe Program Plan
Stakeholder Group
Mission Statement
Lifecycle Objectives
Doctrine & Policies
Capability Needs Documents
Lifecycle Architecture Products
Joint Capabilities Documents (JCDs)
Initial Capabilities Documents (ICDs)
Capability Development Documents (CDDs)
Capability Production Documents (CPDs)
Integrated Architecture Products
Capability Roadmap
Integrated Master Plan
Integrated Master Schedule
Business Case Documents
Sub-plans
The WBS
Budget & Accounting Functions
Legal & Contract Functions
Acquisition & Supply Functions
Systems Engineering & Integration Functions
HR Function
IT Support Function
Administrative Support Functions
PM
End Users
Systems Integrator
PARM/OEM/System Suppliers
Labs
Peer Program Offices
Operations Offices
Lev
el 1
Lev
el 2
Lev
el 3
Lev
el 4
2404/18/23
Program Office (cont.)
The supporting enterprise ensuring successful evaluation of the SoS capabilities based on mission
− Provides Organizational or (DoD) MOTMLPF supports to projects− Provides infrastructure (e.g., IT) support
Lifecycle evolutionary perspective Planning, managing, doctrine and oversight roles
− Manages the three teams – Plan-Driven, IV&V and Agile PM role in the stakeholder group includes a stakeholder liaison function
− Emerging and important function for SoS/FoS programs Reports to acquisition/service branch
− To (commercial) general manager System Integrator is a role, not an entity
− It has four potential job descriptions simultaneously: • On the three teams• The systems engineering & integration/capability planning at the program level
2504/18/23
Outline
Background, motivation and goals− Relevant needs and trends in SoS system engineering and management− Development objectives
Basic foundations for the SoS WBS− Product-oriented structure− Scalable Spiral Model − Three-team construct
Net centric System of Systems (SoS) Program Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
Implications and anticipated benefits Conclusions
2604/18/23
Implications of Scalable Spiral Model
Evolution-oriented and capability-focused Risk-driven and mission assurance Good transition for the culture and legacy program management
− Good talent pool for Plan-Driven Team Less material-oriented deliverables from early spiral(s)
− Architecture baseline more a focus Different operational philosophy and management skill set
− Build-to-spec will not work− “Best value” objectives− Cost, risk and schedule as independent variables
Requires forward-looking vision and a new breed of PMs
2704/18/23
Implications of Standardized SoS-Level WBS
Two prevalent structures:− Product-oriented− Activity-based
Integration with process-oriented and activity-based structures− Start with one structure at the top and integrate elements of the other at
lower levels Need to provide clear and consistent definition of terms
− Or potential risks of double-counting− Need for glossary and data dictionary
Possible different organizations for different purposes− Different development models
Less clear boundary for scope and division of responsibility− Are the day-to-day operational activities (and personnel) “sunk cost”?− Whose responsibility is it to establish doctrine, program office or larger
enterprise? Implications to cost estimating Linkage to other architecture products
2804/18/23
Anticipated Benefits
Provides a reference model for SoS/FoS engineering and management Defines a common set of terminology related to SoSs Enables visibility and insights into unique issues related to SoSs Provides a holistic view for SoS engineering and program management,
particularly in terms of− Interoperability− Complexity and interdependency− Ownership and governance model− Conflict management− Decision framework
Facilitates further understanding of the − Effort and cost in acquiring and owning an SoS− Methodology that can be applied to estimate this cost
Promotes the unification of systems engineering and project management for SoS− Linkage between architecting/engineering activities to the economic effect
2904/18/23
Outline
Background, motivation and goals− Relevant needs and trends in SoS system engineering and management− Development objectives
Basic foundations for the SoS WBS− Product-oriented structure− Scalable Spiral Model − Three-team construct
Net centric System of Systems (SoS) Program Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
Implications and anticipated benefits Conclusions
3004/18/23
Conclusions To Date
General systems engineering principles and project management practices do apply to net centric SoS
Traditional system-oriented WBS construct is inadequate, and there are added ingredients in WBS for net centric SoS, from− Added complexity− Different scope, objectives and strategy− Different environment
Two different acquisition focuses:− System: functionality− System of systems: capability
And, therefore, two different development strategies:− System: waterfall− System of systems: scalable spiral
Not a complete WBS, but a step towards that direction A lot to learn, and more to explore…
3104/18/23
References
1) B. Boehm, “The Future of Software and Systems Engineering Processes,” USC-CSE-TR-2005-507, 2005
2) Boehm, B. and Turner, R., Line Dancing with Elephants – the Systems Engineering of Network-centric Complex systems of Systems (NCSOS), SSCI Member Forum, 2005
3) A. Ruskin, “Using 100% Product-Oriented Work Breakdown Structures to Unify System Engineering and Project Management,” ICSE-INCOSE, 2004
4) A. Sage and C. Cuppan, “On the Systems Engineering and Management of Systems of Systems and Federations of Systems,” Information.Knowledge.Systems Management, 2001
5) M. Jamshidi, “System-of-Systems Engineering – a Definition,” IEEE SMC 2005, Hawaii, October 2005
6) J. Lane and R. Valerdi, “Synthesizing System-of-Systems Concepts for Use in Cost Estimation,” IEEE SMC, 2005
7) J. Lane, “COSOSIMO Workshop Minutes,” 20058) C. Dickerson and et al, Using Architectures for Research, Development and Acquisition, OASD-NII,
20049) P. Jain, and C. Dickerson, “Family-of-Systems Architecture Analysis Technologies,” INCOSE, 200510) D. Bracamonte, “An Adaptive Automated Model for formatting & Presenting Life Cycle Costs,” ISPP
Proceedings, 1993 11) ISO/IEC 15288, Systems Engineering – System Life Cycle Processes, 200212) DoD Instruction 5000.2, Operation of Defense Acquisition System, 200013) ANSI/EIA 632, Process for Engineering a System, 199914) J. Martin, “Overview of the EIA 632 Standard – ‘Processes for Engineering a System’ (Tutorial G)”15) MIL-HDBK-881, DoD Work Breakdown Structure, 1993
3304/18/23
Example of Product-Oriented WBS
The System
The System Plan
System Requirements
The System Design
The Integrated and Verified
System
The Subsystems
System Post-Accomplishment
ProductsThe Validated
System
Subsystems 1 Subsystems i Subsystems n… …
The Subsystem i Plan
Subsystem i Requirements
The Subsystem i Design
The Integrated and Verified Subsystem i
The Subsystem i’s Sub-Subsystems
Subsystem i Post-Accomplishment
ProductsThe Validated Subsystem i
Source: A. M. Ruskin
System-level WBS…
… for engineering and constructing a system