Department defense systems engineering handbook

This is largely thanks to adherence to sound SE principles. All of this was confirmed in Operational Verification testing the final exam and described as an unparalleled success, passing with flying colors and receiving the highest possible endorsement.

The report cited many examples of why the program was successful, including:. By funding the new avionics outside the main development program, the program manager was able to compartmentalize his risk and undertake a new development project without impacting the rest of the program.

While not all programs are designed in the same way, and risk tolerances vary across systems, understanding the advantages of these approaches can inform future development programs. Despite increased emphasis on SE, the DoD has also learned important lessons from several significant failures to deliver weapons systems on time, on budget, and with the requisite capabilities. In the cost domain, these failures can be measured in terms of Nunn-McCurdy breaches Figure 2. When that happens, DoD must notify Congress of the breach.

As part of the Weapons System Acquisition Reform Act, any program that experiences a critical breach is terminated unless it is certified by the secretary of defense. Programs that are certified typically undergo a restructuring, a revocation of previous milestone approvals, and require a written explanation as to the root cause of the cost growth.

The process and tools: Organizational changes have been made at the DoD to emphasize the importance of SE. Additionally, it has ownership of the Systems Engineering Plan SEP , a document required by all major defense acquisition programs that gives the project manager a framework for identifying the important SE components to execute a program. The SEP template addresses:. While templates and documentation are important in instilling SE discipline across an organization, it is equally important to ensure that their intent is carried out by the project team.

By establishing this office, the DoD is making a concerted effort to acquire, train, and retain the best SE talent possible. Instilling sound systems engineering principles across a large enterprise requires both structural and cultural change. Architected by the former assistant secretary of defense for acquisition, technology, and logistics, this initiative consists of 23 principles aimed at increasing DoD efficiency and productivity.

Several of these core areas are dependent on the development and execution of SE principles, specifically: controlling lifecycle cost, spurring and incentivizing innovation, removing unproductive processes, and improving the tradecraft and professionalism of the workforce. The overall series [of reports] presents strong evidence that the DoD has moved—and is moving—in the right direction with regard to the cost, schedule, and quality of the products we deliver.

There is, of course, much more that can be done to improve defense acquisition, but with the 5-year moving average of cost growth on our largest and highest-risk programs at a year low, it is hard to argue that we are not moving in the right direction. Specifically, from to , the growth of contracted costs for major development acquisition programs MDAP shrunk from 9 percent to 3.

Additionally, it was mentioned in the discussion above that Nunn-McCurdy breaches are an indicator of cost growth that could be attributed to poor systems engineering discipline.

In the years since BBP was implemented, these breaches have significantly declined. Figure 3 shows the decreasing trend in the percentage of breaches vs. While cost growth seems to be moving in the right direction, schedule growth metrics show mixed performance in the report. In some cases, there is a decrease in schedule growth, while in other cases there is zero, or even an increase in schedule growth.

This emphasizes the fact that continual improvement is required, and the DoD must continue to develop its workforce to instill the systems engineering discipline needed for success. It should be noted that independent of schedule overruns, the DoD has seen a significant increase in planned schedule duration, from an average of three years in to an average of six and a half years in This data directly correlates with the complexity of the systems the department is procuring. As the DoD moves from independent systems toward systems of systems, this duration will continue to grow, reinforcing the need for proper program control.

By implementing structural, cultural and strategic changes, the DoD can gain significant returns on its investment in SE—from basic research, to weapon development, to the integration of systems of systems. Army Weapons System Handbook.

DoD Source Selection Procedures. TechFAR Handbook. Incentive Strategies for Defense Acquisitions. Navy Marine Acquisition Guidebook. Naval Architecture Contract Guidebook. DoD Audit Manual. Contracting Professional Smart Guide. Other Transaction Guide for Projects. Air Force Award Fee Guide. Developing a Performance Work Statement Handbook. Incentive and Other Contract Types.

Innovative Contracting Case Studies. Cost Estimating. Parametric Estimating Handbook. Army Cost Analysis Manual.

Contractor and Vendor Payment Information Guidebook. Financial Management. DoD Inflation Handbook 2nd Edition. DoD Inflation Handbook 1st Edition. Navy Multiyear Procurement Guidebook. Navy Total Ownership Cost Guidebook. Human Systems Integration. Glossary of Key Information Security Terms. Information Assurance. Navy Information Assurance Manual. Flexibility Sustainment Guide.

DoD Logistics Assessment Guidebook. Manufacturing Readiness Level Deskbook v2.