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

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

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

Video 11/21/2018

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

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

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

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?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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