You are on page 1of 4

INCOSE WMA Newsletter

April 2010
Upcoming Events
Presidents Word
First, I would like to extend my apology for missing
the meeting. I care too much for our members
health and well-being to attend the meeting under May
the weather. However, I did hear that everything
went well and that we were able to over the May 11th: Monthly Meeting @ Brio
challenges from the previous month. Now it is Join Lesley Painchaud for a presentation on
official, Experiment Trial #2 was a success. Implementing the Net-Ready Key Performance
Parameter. Defense programs that need to
I look forward to seeing everyone at the next connect to the network are required to meet net-
meeting. readiness requirements, to include Net-Ready Key
Performance Parameter (NR-KPP) compliance.

Sincerely, 6:00 p.m. 8:00 p.m. @ the Brio Tuscan Grille


Banquet Room, 7854L Tysons Corner Center
McLean, VA.
Steven H. Dam
INCOSE WMA President

INSIDE THIS ISSUE Language the Program


1 Presidents Word
Author: Jorg Largent with inputs from James R. van
1 Upcoming Events Gaasbeek
1-2 Language the Program
INCOSE Fellow Jack Ring has been cited as a
3 Whats in it for You source of some insight into the challenge. An
observation attributed to Mr. Ring is that he has, on
4 May Overview
several occasions, defined the systems engineers
4 Building your CONOPS job as:
1. Language the program
2. Define the problem
3. Drive the development effort to a balanced
solution
4. Show the customer that what you delivered
2

is what he or she thought he or she was The message should be crafted in the
buying. language of the project.
The language should facilitate defining the
The first item is critical to reduce the confusion problem, driving the development effort
and babble when you have a multi-part customer to a balanced solution, and managing
(joint programs) and numerous other customer expectations.
stakeholders. It is also critical within the contractor
community. Remember also that he who defines So while the importance of language the
the terms of the argument controls the argument. problem is axiomatic, the discussion above
Words have meaning, and it helps to have a provides no clear definition of the qualifications
common understanding. of a systems engineer to meet the challenge, nor
does it include any metrics to measure the
One of the INCOSE working groups, focusing on challenge. For example: Would one metric be that
how best to support a particular industry, is only those immersed in the community convey
addressing the language the program challenge the systems engineering message in the language
and is developing an answer tailored to the needs of the project? And if so, how would a systems
of that industry. An inquiry for suggestions from engineer qualify for the role on a complex project
outside that industrys community prompted a involving multiple communities (manufacturing
response with two points of note: facilities, operational facilities, training of
producers, users and maintainers, operations,
1. Rather than looking to other systems maintenance, et al).
engineers to develop the message, perhaps
soliciting the input from those in the The discussion above is not comprehensive.
community will yield a more compelling Rather it is intended to provide a snapshot of one
one. of the challenges faced by those of us in the
2. In order to be understood, the message systems engineering profession. Comments and
needs to be in the language of the differing perspectives are welcome. Please send
customer. The message should be based on your comments to Jorg Largent at
his or her needs and crafted in their jorg.largent@incose.org.
terminology.
Reprinted courtesy of the Los Angeles INCOSE
Very little, if any, scientific data-gathering and Chapter.
analysis are needed to recognize the vulnerability
any activity involving two or more people has to
misunderstanding due to a lack of mutual
understanding at the onset. The relationship is
axiomatic. Given that language the program is
important as the first step in communicating the
systems engineering process, the question
becomes, What does it look like?
3

Whats in It for You: to our Military and private employers are much more likely to
encourage/require their staff members to
Government Members participate in INCOSE and INCOSE activities such
Author: L.Nasta, INCOSE-WMA Director as the meetings and tutorials because: 1) CSEPs
help them win proposals; 2) tutorials offered by
Therefore, we have shared feedback from last years INCOSE cover relevant SE topics and are typically
member survey with our members in the March Monthly significantly less expensive then commercial
Meeting, and of course, your Board of Directors has been courses.
busily working to try and figure out the best ways to make While government managers/supervisors know
chapter activities engaging for ALL our members. But what about DAU and DAWIA certification, they know
many of you might not know is we also have metrics on the less about the content/basis for the INCOSE
makeup of our membership. While a large proportion certifications because it is not publicized or
comes from the contracting/consulting community, and socialized enough in the government spaces or
from academia, there is a sizable contingent representing even by DAU. (Did you know that government staff
most all branches of the services and of course government who has successfully passed the CSEP-Acquisition
civilians. However, we have noticed that among exam can waive two required DAU courses
participants at monthly meetings, and in tutorials, the towards DAWIA certification?)
participation from this group is typically quite low. So I set Many military services and government agencies
out to try and investigate why (in a perfectly non-scientific develop their own in-house training and mandate
way), and add some theories of my own based on my many it for staff rather then utilize training/education
years in the chapter and general observations as a that may already be readily
contractor working for government and military clients available and affordable and (potentially) more
(again non-scientific). leading edge then what they offer internally.
Maybe this could even save taxpayer dollarsheh,
Therefore, I decided to interview a government civilian maybe someone should do a study?
staffer at one of our Intelligence Agencies who is a dues- We (the collective INCOSE we and the Chapter
paying member, and ask him whats up? (his identify will we) need to communicate the value
remain a secret just to keep you guessing). I uncovered no proposition of INCOSE-WMA Monthly Meetings
real deep dark secret as to why his participation was low to and Tutorials better and using other
non-existent to date, with the possible exception of the communication methods and modes to our
fact that he has had no real incentive from his employer military and government members.
(i.e. the government agency) to engage in INCOSE or
INCOSE-related training. As this individual was a contractor I hope that this article is a step in the right direction, and it
for a number of years before he went government, he will garner your attention (if not a chuckle here and there).
noted his association with INCOSE actually predated his We would love to hear from you. Therefore, it is your turn;
government hire. However, he was able to identify that his please feel free to send the Board your comments in reply
former employer (Northrop Grumman) actively promoted to this article.
participation in INCOSE and in becoming certified as a
systems engineer. (Northrop Grumman has an active
training program to encourage their staff to get the CSEP,
as does other contractors like Booz Allen Hamilton.) He
noted he was encouraged to take courses at DAU (for
DAWIA certification), and participate in college
cohort/master program for SE but that INCOSE was not
noted as a training resource. On a more personal note, he
did indicate he lived in MD and was more likely inclined not
to participate due to timing/location than anything else.
His former points seem to align more with my own
observations, to wit:
4

May Presentation Overview Building your Concept of Operations


Implementing the Net-Ready Key Performance Parameter Author: Dr. Steven H. Dam, WMA Chapter President
Presenter: Lesley Painchaud, CV Chapter President One of the lost arts in Systems Engineering is the
development and use of the Concept of Operations
Defense programs that need to connect to the network (CONOPS). Dr. Steven Dam along with Dr. Dinesh
are required to meet net-readiness requirements, to Verma authored a chapter on this subject in a recent
include Net-Ready Key Performance Parameter (NR- Joint DoD/NASA-sponsored book entitled Applied
KPP) compliance. Programs have generally had Space Systems Engineering.
difficulty in developing derived requirements from the
NR-KPP Compliance Statement. Dr. Dam will use this text and recent experience in
developing CONOPS for the Department of Defense to
The Navys Net-Ready Key Performance Parameter (NR- discuss how to develop a CONOPS using architectures
KPP) Implementation Guidebook, developed by the and scenarios.
Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (ASN)
This tutorial will discuss how to:
(Research, Development, and Acquisition (RDA)) Chief
Systems Engineer (CHSENG), clarifies the definitions of 1) Validate the mission scope and the system
net-readiness and the NR-KPP. It also describes a boundary;
refined NR-KPP Compliance Statement that programs
2) Describe the operational environment, and
can use as a template for their derived NR-KPP
primary constraints and drivers;
requirements. This Guidebook provides Program
Managers, Systems Engineers, and Test Engineers with 3) Develop key operational scenarios, and
a methodology for decomposing the NR-KPP associated timelines;
Compliance Statement into measurable and testable
4) Synthesize, analyze, and assess key
derived requirements that they can address using their
normal Systems Engineering Process. The Four-Step
implementation concepts;
Process includes the following activities: 5) Validate and baseline the operational
architecture for the system of interest; and
A Mission Analysis (MA) to determine derived NR-KPP
Operational Requirements in terms of missions, mission 6) Document and iterate through Architecture
activities, and associated Mission Effectiveness and and the DoD Architecture Framework.
Operational Performance Measures. Come participate in this dynamic and interesting
An Information Analysis (InA) to determine the derived tutorial.
Operational Information Requirements in terms of
required networks, mission thread Information
Elements, and associated Operational Performance
Measures.
Systems Engineering (SE) to decompose the derived
requirements defined in the MA and InA into System
Performance Requirements for use during System
Design and Realization.
Documentation of the Four-Step Process according to
engineering best practices and Compliance Measures in
the NR-KPP Compliance Statement.

For more information on INCOSE WMA, please visit www.incose-wma.org