PRODUCT MANAGEMENT/ PRODUCT DIRECTOR OFFICE TEAM OF THE YEAR (05 LEVEL)

Transcription

1

2 Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology 2016 Army Acquisition Executive s (AAE) Excellence in Leadership Award PRODUCT MANAGEMENT/ PRODUCT DIRECTOR OFFICE TEAM OF THE YEAR (05 LEVEL) Nominating Organization: PEO CS&CSS PM FP PdM Bridging 6501 E. 11 Mile Road Warren, MI Administrative Information Nomination Submission POC: LTC Jeff Biggans, , jeffrey.s.biggans.mil@mail.mil Team Name: Joint Assault Bridge (JAB) Integrated Product Team (IPT) Team Leader: Ms. Donna Morgan Team Leader donna.j.morgan22.civ@mail.mil

3 Award Narrative Background: The Joint Assault Bridge Integrated Product Team (IPT) manages the development and production of a critical assault gap crossing capability for heavy combat maneuver forces. The JAB will replace the Armored Vehicle Launched Bridge (AVLB), which is beyond its intended useful life and is a challenge to maintain an operationally ready fleet due to obsolescence issues. The JAB improves survivability and mobility of the assault bridgelaying platform by re-utilizing excess M1A1 Abrams tank chassis, and integrating a modern bridge launching mechanism on the more survivable and maneuverable M1A1 compared to the M60 tank chassis of the AVLBs. The Army intends to procure 337 JABs with eighteen-meter bridges capable of a military load classification 85. The JAB IPT is led by a team within the Product Manager (PdM) Bridging, that also includes the acquisition and life-cycle support of sixteen Department of Defense equipment systems within the Army s Project Office, Force Projection which is subordinate to the Program Executive Officer, Combat Support and Combat Service Support (CS&CSS). The JAB is an Army Acquisition Category II program, with an Average Unit Procurement Cost of $5.8 million per system, and an Army Acquisition Objective of 337 systems. During the past year, the Integrated Product Team (IPT) for the Joint Assault Bridge (JAB) completed efforts supporting a production contract award on 11 May 2016, valued over $400 million for an eight-year period of performance. Over the course of the past year, the JAB IPT worked to include technical data rights into the JAB Request for Proposal (RFP) allowing technical data to be completed during full and open competition resulting in a $79 million savings. Efforts to increase competition within the core framework of the latest Better Buying Power initiatives resulted in a cost avoidance of nearly $300 million compared against the most recent Life Cycle Cost Estimate. The government valued the technical data to support recompeting the follow-on contract at $80 million, and the contract award included the technical data as a $700 thousand option. The JAB IPT included proposal language that incentivized the contractors to create a public-private partnership with Anniston Army Depot (ANAD) under a Total Production Management concept requiring the contractor to be responsible for supply chain management and quality control of the production efforts planned at the depot. The JAB IPT managed the key performance risk to the program, a potential shortfall between the force protection and survivability requirements dating back to the early 80 s, and the current, realistic threats, by managing risk through efforts through a unique Configuration Steering Board that clarified the force protection and survivability requirements ahead of live fire testing and evaluation. The JAB IPT conducted risk mitigation efforts for crew protection by designing and testing a potential armor improvement prior to contract award. The effort for armor testing prior to contract award also reduced risk to the full material release schedule. The JAB IPT is truly deserving of this recognition for their outstanding accomplishments on a system vital to Army Engineers, enabling freedom of maneuver on the battlefield and the ability to keep pace with the Armored Brigade Combat Teams and Mobility Augmentation Companies. Talent management and knowledge transfer efforts to build competencies of current and future leaders: During the past year, the JAB IPT and its parent organization experienced approximately 30% turn-over in new personnel during critical Milestone C documentation preparations, source selection support, and mitigation of crew force protection concerns. The majority of the JAB IPT is built through memorandums of agreement with matrix organizations, with large support from contracting command, TACOM logistics divisions, and TARDEC

4 engineering. At every JAB IPT, it was evident that diversity of backgrounds and experiences were welcomed and encouraged to tackle tough and unique problems facing the relatively smallstaffed JAB program. Throughout 2016, the JAB IPT regularly participated in scheduled Bridging Supervisory Leadership Forums, Team Chief Leadership Forums and Bridging Roundtables. These all provided, at different levels of the collective Bridging workforce, the sharing of ideas, best practices, and lessons learned to help foster teamwork and the sharing of information within the geographic disparate team to include key stakeholders in HQDA, ASA (ALT) and TRADOC. The Bridging Roundtables provided professional development and shared lessons learned across the matrix organization, focusing on logistics, acquisition best practices, and promoting respect between functional areas of expertise. Additionally, JAB IPT members were often directed to seek out the best practices of the JAB s peer organizations, especially those successfully navigating similar challenges such as peers from the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, and Medium and Heavy Tactical Vehicle programs. The JAB IPT leaders involved and enabled participation of team members in high-level General Officer/Senior Executive Service chaired meetings, such as a configuration steering board in April 2016 between the commandants, the Engineer School and the JAB Milestone Decision Authority for clarify the crew force protection requirements. By providing junior JAB IPT members the opportunity to attend and brief at these meetings, it helped develop and posture them for positions of increased responsibility. JAB IPT members were also encouraged to apply for developmental assignments as they arose which three people did in the areas of the ASARC Secretariat, Program Officer, an NH-4 level developmental promotion, and HQDA G8 Staff Synchronization Officer developmental programs. These assignments helped accelerate their learning and gave them a better understanding of Army acquisition processes. Additionally, one teammate fulfilled an assignment in the CENTCOM Theater as PM Force Projection Forward, a six-month deployment, to ensure PM Force Projection products are properly supported. The JAB IPT leaders consciously requested junior members of the team and matrix support organization to attend meetings in the Pentagon or via video teleconference for their professional growth and development. Supporting the principles of the ASA(ALT) priorities: The JAB IPT demonstrated their understanding of the ASA(ALT) priorities of: People, Products and Processes throughout the past year while working to get the JAB production contract awarded, while also managing current programs and future schedule risks relating evaluation of crew force protection. Achieve Affordable Products: During the past year, the JAB IPT completed efforts supporting a contract worth up to $400 million, for an eight-year production contract awarded on 11 May The JAB IPT worked to include technical data rights into the JAB request for proposal allowing technical data to be competed in the full and open competition within the framework of the Better Buying Power initiatives. The government valued the technical data at $80 million to support a later competition for a follow-on contract. The contract award resulted in the technical data being included in the price of the JAB plus only a $700 thousand option to procure the technical data package to allow the government to compete the production design at the conclusion of the eight year period of performance. The JAB IPT designed a unique and creative request for proposal process that ultimately stands to realize savings of up to $300 million in production costs over eight years based upon comparing the actual contract price of

5 $400 million for up to 270 plus JABs over eight years to the recent Life Cycle Cost Estimate for the JAB production that estimated the contract value at over $700 million for the same period. Process - Control Costs Throughout the Product Lifecycle: The JAB IPT designed in lifecycle cost control measures in their request for proposal (RFP) for the JAB production contract by requesting and evaluating technical data during the source selection process, and by incentivizing the contractors to create a public/private partnership (PPP) with Anniston Army Depot (ANAD). The government valued the technical data rights at $80 million, but recently awarded the contract for a technical data package (TDP) delivery of less than $1 million, while also reducing expected lifecycle production costs by almost 50%. If the JAB program is funded to support full rate production capability of 48 JABs per year starting in fiscal year 2020, the government could realize up $380 million in savings over eight years including delivery of the TDP and the lower contract price for the bridge launcher contract compared against the 2016 Life Cycle Cost Estimate (LCCE). The government plans to conduct make/buy analysis for supplying parts either through contractor control or through organic government management beyond the third year of production with a goal of achieving the best value for the government over the entire lifecycle of managing the JAB sustainment components. People and Process - Incentivize Productivity in Industry and Government: The JAB IPT incentivized a PPP with ANAD with the aim to pay the contractor to control quality of production at ANAD, ultimately reducing programmatic costs, as well as the contractor being responsible for supply chain management to reduce production schedule risks. Quality control and supply chain management are areas of high risk in many acquisition programs, and especially challenging at government depots. The request for proposal for the JAB production contract incentivized the contractor to assume responsibility of these challenging production issues at the depot. Because the JAB IPT is staffed at Acquisition Category (ACAT) III levels, which is about one-third the size of a typical ACAT I IPT, it was important to shift responsibility of depot production quality control and supply chain management as far into the contractor s lane as possible. The unique request for proposal created three work breakdown structures in which the government would pay depot labor and parts for all of the work on chassis teardown, and the contractor could select depot task for production that the government would also fund directly. This incentivized the contractor to select as many chassis production tasks as possible at the depot, and limited risk to the contractor concerning depot labor rates increasing over the life of the production contract. Process - Eliminate Unproductive Processes and Bureaucracy: The JAB IPT worked closely with the Milestone Decision Action Coordinator (MDAC) of the office of the Program Executive Officer for Combat Support and Combat Service Support (PEO CS&CSS) to create an efficient Milestone C package without undue, excessive staffing requirements. The JAB IPT worked with the PEO CS&CSS MDAC to reduce the required documents from over 50, to 34 documents for Milestone C decision and eventual approval. Product - Promote Effective Competition: The Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase ensured competition for the production contract by awarding two contractors EMD contracts. The strategy for two EMD contracts ensured effective competition for the production contracts. The JAB IPT also increased the effective years of the production contract by challenging Army contracting norms by making the contract period eight years, vice the more

6 traditional five year period. An eight year contract period allowed for effective development of the requested technical data for the production contract, and allow for future full and open competition for the remaining JABs that need produced beyond the eight year period of performance of the initial JAB production contract. The unique request for proposal with the three work break down structures for task relating to preparing the tank chassis, remanufacturing of the tank chassis, and integrating the bridge launcher mechanism ensured the maximum competition possible for the JAB production contract by incentivizing a non-tank chassis original equipment manufacturer to partner with an organic government depot that could provide inherit tank chassis production expertise.

7 Award Citation Joint Assault Bridge Integrated Product Team Award Citation The Joint Assault Bridge (JAB) is the Army and the Marine Corp s solution to modernizing and improving assault gap crossing capabilities for the maneuver forces. The JAB Integrated Product Team (IPT) adopted the best practices of Better Buying Power to manage the engineering and manufacturing development phase testing, the request for proposal process, the milestone C approval, and award of an eight year production contract valued at more than $400 million. The JAB IPT consists of approximately 75 individuals, roughly one-third the size of typical Acquisition Category I programs, while under oversight of the Office of the Secretary of Defense for live fire and operational testing. The diversity of backgrounds and expertise ultimately led to successful mitigation of difficult problems relating to technical data and force protection requirements. The JAB IPT embraced the successes of peers, and tailored their best practices for requesting and evaluating technical data in support of the low rate initial production contract. The JAB contract award included a unit cost below the life cycle cost estimate by nearly $300 million over eight years, and included the technical data package for a price approximately $80 million below what the IPT valued the data s worth to the government.