© 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Establishing a Network Centric Capability: Implications for Acquisition and Engineering Dennis Smith Complex System Symposium.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 The Systems Engineering Research Center UARC Dr. Dinesh Verma Executive Director January 13,
Advertisements

Twelve Cs for Team Building
The Changing Face of Higher Ed and the Role of IT as a Strategic Enabler Dave Wallace Chief Information Officer University of Waterloo December 4, 2012.
© 2009 The MITRE Corporation. All rights Reserved. Evolutionary Strategies for the Development of a SOA-Enabled USMC Enterprise Mohamed Hussein, Ph.D.
ERS Overview 5/15/12 | Page-1 Distribution Statement A – Cleared for public release by OSR, SR Case #s 12-S-0258, 0817, 1003, and 1854 apply. Affordable,
BENEFITS OF SUCCESSFUL IT MODERNIZATION
Building an Operational Enterprise Architecture and Service Oriented Architecture Best Practices Presented by: Ajay Budhraja Copyright 2006 Ajay Budhraja,
International City/County Management Association, 2001 September 23, 2001 Develop new models of how things work. Reinvent service delivery from the customer.
Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Defense © 2005 by Carnegie Mellon University 1 Pittsburgh, PA Dennis Smith, David Carney and Ed Morris DEAS.
Risk & Novelty Collaboration & Engagement Efficiency & Effectiveness Transferability & Scalability  DVEIVR is a DoD/VA Initiative developed to allow our.
Systems Engineering in a System of Systems Context
Connecting People With Information DoD Net-Centric Services Strategy Frank Petroski October 31, 2006.
Enterprise Integration Architecture IPMA Professional Development Seminar June 29, 2006 Scott Came Director, Enterprise Architecture Program Washington.
Entrenching SOA in the organisation
© 2006 IBM Corporation IBM Software Group Relevance of Service Orientated Architecture to an Academic Infrastructure Gareth Greenwood, e-learning Evangelist,
IT Governance and Management
1 Introduction to: Information systems architectures and infrastructures.
1 July 23, 2002 Strategic Technology Plan Briefing to LOT Committee.
Network Enabled Capability Through Innovative Systems Engineering Service Oriented Integration of Systems for Military Capability Duncan Russell, Nik Looker,
© 2006 IBM Corporation SOA on your terms and our expertise Discovering the Value of SOA SOA In Action SOA & End-2-End Business Driven Development using.
From the IT Assessment to the IT Roadmap ( )
KM enhances mission command, facilitates the exchange of knowledge, supports doctrine development, fosters leaders’ development, supports lessons learned,
Yale Solutions Design October 2012
Information Technology Division Executive Office for Administration and Finance Shared Application Infrastructure (SAI) Program Overview.
Acquiring Information Systems and Applications
Georgetown UNIVERSITY Part I: Service Oriented Architecture Seminars on Academic Computing Directors Leadership Seminar, August 7, 2007 Charles F. Leonhardt,
Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Defense © 2006 by Carnegie Mellon University Version E-Gov 2006Benefits, Misconceptions and SOA Governance Issues -
Engineering, Operations & Technology | Information TechnologyAPEX | 1 Copyright © 2009 Boeing. All rights reserved. Architecture Concept UG D- DOC UG D-
DoD Acquisition Domain (Sourcing) (DADS) Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) E-Business/SPS Joint Users’ Conference November 15-19, 2004 Houston, TX.
Organizational Change
© 2001 Carnegie Mellon University S8A-1 OCTAVE SM Process 8 Develop Protection Strategy Workshop A: Protection Strategy Development Software Engineering.
Certification and Accreditation CS Phase-1: Definition Atif Sultanuddin Raja Chawat Raja Chawat.
IAM REFERENCE ARCHITECTURE BRICKS EMBEDED ARCHITECTS COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE MARCH 5, 2015.
Strategic Mobility 21 Focused on Making Decision Relevant Data A Logistics Multiplier in All Domains Strategic Mobility 21 Focused on Making Decision Relevant.
Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) at NIH Bill Jones
MDS Global IT Strategy Discussion July 7, Agenda  IntroductionErnest  Strategic directionsGanesh  DiscussionAll  Next stepsErnest.
Context Inspired Component Architecture Navigating the Shifting Currents of Data xmlCoP Meeting May 18, 2005 ANSI Accredited Standards Committee X12 Ralph.
Transforming Elementary Education Management : a perspective on institutional development Dr Pramila Menon NUEPA, New Delhi.
CPSC 871 John D. McGregor Module 6 Session 3 System of Systems.
Innovations in GI Technologies Panel Discussion, GSDI 6 September 18, 2002 Innovations in GI Technologies Panel Discussion, GSDI 6 September 18, 2002 Jack.
Enterprise Architecture, Enterprise Data Management, and Data Standardization Efforts at the U.S. Department of Education May 2006 Joe Rose, Chief Architect.
SOA: An Approach to Information Sharing BJA Regional Information Sharing Conference Houston, TX February 7, 2007 Scott Came Director of Systems and Technology.
1 Advanced Software Architecture Muhammad Bilal Bashir PhD Scholar (Computer Science) Mohammad Ali Jinnah University.
Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) Dennis Schwarz November 21, 2008.
Open Health Tools Strategic Plan. Mission “to significantly contribute to the health and well-being of individuals and communities by improving their.
EPA Geospatial Segment United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Environmental Information Enterprise Architecture Program Segment Architecture.
Catawba County Board of Commissioners Retreat June 11, 2007 It is a great time to be an innovator 2007 Technology Strategic Plan *
UNCLASSIFIED A Chief Information Officer’s Perspective on Service-Oriented Architecture Presented to Service-Oriented Architectures for E-Government Conference.
Chapter © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
Strategic Planning Workshop  Presented by: Jason P Aubee.
The PHEA Educational Technology Initiative. Project Partners PHEA Foundations – Ford, Carnegie, Kresge, MacArthur South African Institute for Distance.
1 Advanced Collaborative Environments Kris Brown Carmel Conaty Johnny Medina.
IEEE IT (Information Technology) Strategy – 2005 Unapproved.
1 Power to the Edge Agility Focus and Convergence Adapting C2 to the 21 st Century presented to the Focus, Agility and Convergence Team Inaugural Meeting.
Managing for results Day 9 Module: Management.
BPM Intro Prof. dr. Koen Vanhoof Room 0.03 wet.park 5.
National Geospatial Enterprise Architecture N S D I National Spatial Data Infrastructure An Architectural Process Overview Presented by Eliot Christian.
Time to answer critical and inter-related questions: Whom will we serve? What will we offer? How will we serve them?
Competitive and Collaborative Strategies.  General Environment ◦ Social, Technological, Economic, Ecological, and political forces  Task Environment.
FROM PRINCIPLE TO PRACTICE: Implementing the Principles for Digital Development Perspectives and Recommendations from the Practitioner Community.
8a Certified. About Us  Headquarters in Vienna, VA  Service Disabled Veteran-owned Small Business  SBA 8(a) program participant  Small Disadvantaged.
Towards an Enterprise Architecture for Wits In the context of the new Student Information System programme Prof Derek W. Keats Deputy Vice Chancellor (Knowledge.
Service Oriented Architecture Enabling the Agile and Flexible Business of the 21 st Century.
Why KM is Important KM enhances mission command, facilitates the exchange of knowledge, supports doctrine development, fosters leaders’ development, supports.
JOINED AT THE HIP: DEVSECOPS AND CLOUD-BASED ASSETS
Enterprise Architecture at Penn State
Agenda Purpose for Project Goals & Objectives Project Process & Status Common Themes Outcomes & Deliverables Next steps.
Part I: Service Oriented Architecture
IEEE Architecture Council Overview
I4.0 in Action The importance of people and culture in the Industry 4.0 transformation journey Industry 4.0 Industry 3.0 Industry 2.0 Industry 1.0 Cyber.
Presentation transcript:

© 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Establishing a Network Centric Capability: Implications for Acquisition and Engineering Dennis Smith Complex System Symposium January , 2007

2 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Agenda The landscape Strategies for implementing the network centric vision Issues for a specific type of implementation: service-oriented architecture

3 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University The Reality of the Current Landscape “Possibly the single-most transforming thing in our forces will not be a weapons system, but a set of interconnections and a substantially enhanced capability because of that awareness.” —Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld

4 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Some Essential Differences Monolithic Systems Network Centric Systems of Systems Standalone; fixed predetermined purpose Interdependent; continuously evolving purpose & strategy Hierarchically structured; central control; clearly defined boundaries Network structured; distributed control; unbounded All components known and visibleChanging and unknown constituents Tight coupling/control are good – increased likelihood of success Loose coupling/control are good – creates options/alternatives for adaptation & evolution; enables local decision making (“power to the edge”); increases success

5 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Strategies for Implementing the NCO Vision- 1 Identify engineering implications of network centric missions Determine types of information and steps necessary to perform the missions. Understand the processes, capabilities, techniques, and system support used to perform analogous physical missions Analyze the types of collaboration tools necessary to support network centric operations — e.g, the distribution of personnel across locations Derive broad outcome spaces. Adopt an inclusive view of the network centric community Organizational components Collaborating organizations Open source communities Vendor and standards organizations Academic researchers Potential end users and customers

6 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Strategies for Implementing the NCO Vision- 2 Characterize the existing technology base Characterize technologies and capabilities in terms of being immediately useful, readily adaptable, and potential useful. Develop a lightweight catalog of potential assets. Develop capabilities to rapidly analyze and characterize components submitted to the catalog[ Characterize the gaps between doctrine/mission and the technology base Current operational capabilities Current and planned operational needs Needs that cannot currently be met Activities we cannot coordinate

7 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Strategies for Implementing the NCO Vision- 3 Collaborate with others to develop governance rules Establish a governance committee and encourage participation by all relevant participants. Establish a network centric integration environment focus on integration of components rather than new development. Provide tools that support the integration of independently developed components. — e.g, tools that transform interfaces and data formats, or analyze and monitor interactions among components Populate the environment with components that can be assembled to support network centric operations. Investigate programs with success in building bridges between disparate systems.

8 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Strategies for Implementing the NCO Vision- 4 Establish appropriate reward structure Reward participants for sharing problems, solutions, innovations, and technologies Reward participants for reusing existing capabilities rather than developing their own Reward solutions that minimally limit the flexibility of others (e.g., open interfaces are preferable to proprietary ones) Train network centric command and engineering staff Blur the distinction between operational and engineering support staff Institute new curricula to train engineers with an emphasis on rapid integration and the use of relevant technologies such as SOA

9 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Strategies for Implementing the NCO Vision- 5 Prepare for novel forms of acquisition Adopt an agile acquisition strategy that provides rapidly assembled solutions for short-term problems. Prepare to acquire imperfect tools that can be used immediately rather than tools carefully crafted to meet rigid requirements. Allow implementers and integrators significant freedom in developing solutions. Expect organizational distinctions to become increasingly blurred

10 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University A Specific Type of Implementation: Service-Oriented Architecture Service-oriented architecture is a way of designing systems that enables Cost-efficiency Agility Adaptability Leverage of legacy investments

11 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Services Services are reusable components that represent business tasks. Customer lookup Account lookup Credit card validation Credit check Hotel reservation Interest calculation Services can be Globally distributed across organizations Reconfigured into new business processes

12 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Components of an SOA-Based System Application X Service A SOA Infrastructure Enterprise Information System Application Y Application Z Interne t External System Service B Service C Service D Internal Users DiscoverySecurity Development Tools Legacy or New Code

13 © 2006 Carnegie Mellon University Pillars of SOA-Based Systems Development Strategic Alignment SOA Design Principles SOA-Based Systems Development Technology Evaluation SOA Governance Change of Mindset