Applying the Systems Engineering Method for the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) Chris Ryder and Dave Flanigan 27 October 2005
Purpose JCIDS prescribes a joint forces approach to identify capability gaps against current force capability needs The Systems Engineering (SE) Method applies to each iteration of the systems life-cycle from capability inception through system retirement Good systems engineering practice is necessary for successfully implementing JCIDS Use of model-driven SE facilitates JCIDS throughout the systems life-cycle slide 2
Agenda The Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) The Systems Engineering Method Model-Driven Systems Engineering for JCIDS Why use the Systems Engineering Method JCIDS? slide 3
JCIDS Analysis Briefing Date Strategic Policy Guidance Joint Operations Concepts Functional Area Analysis Functional Needs Analysis Joint Operating Concepts Joint Functional Concepts Integrated Architectures CPD CDD DOTMLPF Analysis Materiel Changes CJCSI 3170 process Ideas for Materiel Approaches Analysis of Materiel Approaches Alternative N Alternative 2 Alternative 1 Post Independent Analysis ICD DOTMLPF Changes CJCSI 3180 Process DOTMLPF Change Recommendation Functional Solution Analysis slide 4
JCIDS Events Briefing Date Functional Area Analysis (FAA) o Identify operational task, conditions, and standards needed to accomplish military objectives o Result: Tasks to be accomplished Functional Needs Analysis (FNA) o Assess ability of current and programmed capabilities to accomplish the tasks o Result: List of capability gaps Functional Solutions Analysis (FSA) o Operational based assessment of DOTMLPF approaches to solving capability gaps o Result: Potential DOTMLPF approaches to capability gaps Post Independent Analysis o Independent analysis of approaches to determine best fit o Result: Initial Capabilities Document slide 5
JCIDS JCIDS analytical process stresses the fundamentals for applying an effective systems engineering program by any accepted standard It guides the front-end phases of the SE process for each capability iteration o Enterprise (operational) analysis o Requirements definition o Life-cycle phase The analysts must have a thorough understanding of existing capabilities as well as the capability needs The JCIDS analysis team eventually determines the optimum combination of material and non-material alternatives to achieve the capability needs to the Battle Force slide 6
Systems Engineering Method Regardless of the analytical phase performed by the JCIDS SE team, o The basic application of the SE method is constant throughout the process Each SE Method activity is performed in some form in each phase of the system life-cycle slide 7
Systems Engineering Method Over Life Cycle JCIDS DOD 5000 Phases FAA/FNA/FSA FAA/FNA/FSA Mission Need Determination ICD Concept Exploration Concept And Technology Development Component Advanced Development CDD System Development & Demonstration System Integration System Demonstration CPD Production & Deployment Operation & Support MS A MS B MS C ISO/IEC 15288 Stages Concept Development Production Utilization Support NPSE Stages Conceptual Technical Feasibility Development Production Preparation Full-scale Production Production Support System Engineering Stages Concept Development Engineering Development Post Development System Engineering Phases Needs Analysis Concept Exploration Concept Definition Advanced Development Engineering Design Integration & Evaluation Production Operation & Support Rational Unified Process for SE Inception Elaboration Construction Transition slide 8 From Systems Engineering: Principles and Practice Kossiakoff and Sweet
The Systems Engineering Method Briefing Date From Preceding Phase Objectives Requirements Analysis Requirements Functional Definition Functions Physical Definition System Model Design Validation slide 9 From Systems Engineering: Principles and Practice Kossiakoff and Sweet To Next Phase
Need Systems Engineering Method Before starting, verify the as stated need is valid User Requirements Analysis Requirements Functional Definition Functional Area Analysis Functions Physical Definition Functional Needs Analysis Potential Solutions Briefing Date Functional Solutions Analysis Program Independent Assessment Verify that the solution meets the need Design Validation slide 10 If current step is not executable, then loop back to previous step (or further) and fix things!! Solution(s)
Problem Definition Systems Engineering Method Legacy Operational Activities Capabilities User Requirements Analysis Briefing Date Rationale, Scope, & Context Sponsor-derived Problem Set Functional Improvements Directed Functions Functional Decomposition Technological Contributions Functional Definition Non-Material DOTMLPF Elements slide 11 Material // Non-Material solution? Material Collect Candidate Systems Physical Definition Analysis M&S Problem satisfied? Design Validation No Yes
Systems Engineering Method Briefing Date User Requirements Analysis Problem Definition Legacy Operational Activities Capabilities Rationale, Scope, & Context Sponsor-derived Problem Set To Functional Analysis Phase slide 12
Problem Definition At one point in time there is a problem that must be solved due to: o Deficient capability with existing systems o Desire to improve existing performance Need to understand what the objectives are to provide the desired capability Define the operational context within the Capability Enterprise! slide 13
Requirements Analysis Products A clear definition of the problem A proper scope of the problem Operational context documents and data bases o Design Reference Mission o Strategy-to-Task Mapping o Concept of Operations o Physical Environment Database o Threat Representation Database o Blue Capabilities Database Relevant Operational Views Captured within a SE Requirements Model slide 14
Systems Engineering Method From Requirements Definition Briefing Date Functional Improvements Technological Contributions Functional Decomposition Directed Functions Functional Definition To Physical Definition slide 15
Functional Definition Products Functional Decomposition of required activities o Functional diagrams (FFBD, UML AD) Associated metrics with these functions (threshold / objective?) Analysis process that determines if you can solve with a material / nonmaterial / both solution o Be able to document and defend this process How do we know it s right? o The functions are legitimate, correct, and validated by users Functional Area Analysis Relevant operational views Functional Analysis Documented in a SE Functional or Logical Model slide 16
Systems Engineering Method Briefing Date From Functional Definition Non-Material DOTMLPF Elements Material / Non-Material solution? Material Collect Candidate Systems To Design Validation Physical Definition slide 17
Physical Definition Products Provide system alternatives towards satisfying required functionality o Assignment of functions to physical elements DOTMLPF analysis products o Based on the functional definition phase CONOPS changes / recommendations o Based on DOTMLPF analysis Risk management strategies of the system System roadmaps to bridge the gap between the current and future capabilities Functional Needs Analysis Relevant operational and SYSTEMS views SE Logical Model with Physical Definition Begins Evolution Toward a Systems Model slide 18
Systems Engineering Method Briefing Date From Physical Definition Analysis M&S Problem satisfied? Design Validation No Reassess requirements, functional elements or physical details Yes To next life-cycle phase: Requirements Definition slide 19
Design Validation Products Demonstrate the analysis documents the assumptions, follows a rigorous process, and arrives at meaningful conclusions that are justifiable o There may be multiple processes and products dependent on the sponsor, personnel/time availability, experience o This may be an iterative process for ICD, CDD, CPD Trade studies VV&A Risk Management Cost Analysis Force Allocation Functional Solutions Analysis Program Independent Assessment Attain a Fully Validated Systems Engineering Model slide 20
Architectures in JCIDS Briefing Date Integrated Architectures are a foundation for the analytical process o Stated requirements, attributes and measures Direct reference to DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF), however: o Architecture is misused term within the realm of SE It is important to differentiate architecture from architectural views The JCIDS SE Model is the foundation for the architecture and the architectural views slide 21
Systems Engineering Model Model is a simplified view of a complex system o Assists stakeholders, including engineers, to understand something that is not easily comprehensible o Communicates the organization of the system to the stakeholders Rechtin o Contributes to the structural stability of a system. o Enhances understanding of interfaces, relationships, operations and risk If you don t model it, you won t understand it. Ivar Jacobson slide 22
Model-Driven SE An Systems Engineering model captures the essential elements of the systems engineering life-cycle Dynamic and recursive process (Bootch, Rumbaugh, Jacobson) o Iteratively captures enterprise capabilities and systems requirements o Promotes incorporation of technology evolution Forms basis for a sound, long-term SE and analysis o Fully compliant with precepts of DoDAF and JCIDS Model-Driven SE in Defense Systems Acquisition becomes Model-Driven JCIDS slide 23
Context of the Capability Enterprise «Enterprise» Capability Enterprise «System» Warfare System Component of «Capability» Capability Object Assigned to Affected by Applies Supported by «System» Threat Systems Affects Applies to «Non-Material» DOTMLPF Supports «System» Communications Networks/ GIG slide 24
DOTMLPF Dot-mil-pe-ef The Non-Material elements of the capability o Doctrine o Organization o Training o Material o Logistics o Personnel o Facilities Investigate if a modification to any element except the M will enhance the Capability Enterprise o A far less expensive option slide 25
Transition from Capability to System Briefing Date «System» System As Is DOTMLPF DOTMLPF can also transition from As Is to To Be The Legacy System Applies to Applies to «Capability» Capability As Is Evolves to «Capability» Capability To Be +Possesses +Closes Assigned to Capability Gap «System» System To Be slide 26
JHU/APL SE Methodology Linkage to JCIDS Briefing Date JHU/APL SE methods can be used to produce JCIDS products/artifacts JHU/APL SE methods can iterate throughout the DoD 5000 lifecycle Good SE methods can produce JCIDS Bad SE methods can produce JCIDS Producing JCIDS does not guarantee good SE Good SE Effective JCIDS slide 27
Final Thoughts JHU/APL has consistently provided SE expertise to numerous programs, following a rigorous and structured SE approach to the problem o It s all about the data o It s all about the rigor Program Offices have anchored their programs to our approaches and data slide 28
Summary Description of JHU/APL SE process JCIDS is consistent with good systems engineering practices JHU/APL SE process is consistent with JCIDS slide 29