navsea 06l navy model-based product support (mbps) project ... · enforced system and data...

“DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C. Distribution authorized to U.S. Government agencies and their contractors (Administrative Use) (6 Dec 2018). Other requests for this document shall be referred to (NAVSEA 06L).”

NAVSEA 06L Navy Model-Based Product Support (MBPS) Project

Technical Supplement

December 6, 2018


Contents I. Scope..................................................................................................................................................... 3 II. Strategic Intent ..................................................................................................................................... 3 III. Enterprise MBPS Requirement ............................................................................................................ 4

A. Enterprise Technical Reference Framework .................................................................................... 4 1. ETRF Guiding Principles ................................................................................................................ 4 2. ETRF Requirements ...................................................................................................................... 5

B. Digital Transformation Data Plan .................................................................................................... 6 C. Digital Transformation Workforce Plan ........................................................................................... 6 D. Enterprise MBPS Overview .............................................................................................................. 7

1. Logistics Services .......................................................................................................................... 7 2. Navy Model-Based Product Support Principles .......................................................................... 8 3. Model-based Product Support Operational View ....................................................................... 9 4. Legacy Program Rationalization ................................................................................................ 11

IV. MBPS Capabilities and Requirements ............................................................................................... 11 A. Capability Overview ....................................................................................................................... 11 B. MPBS System Level Requirements ................................................................................................ 12 C. MBPS Business Needs and Requirements ..................................................................................... 14

1. Navy Product Data Management (NPDM) ................................................................................ 14 2. Navy Common Readiness Model (NCRM) ................................................................................. 15 3. Navy Data Acquisition Requirements Tool (NDART) ................................................................ 17

V. Legacy Application Overview ............................................................................................................. 18 A. Legacy System Overview ................................................................................................................ 18 B. Legacy System Descriptions ........................................................................................................... 19

1. Configuration Data Manager’s Database - Open Architecture (CDMD-OA) ............................ 19 2. Revised Alternative Data Flow WEB (RADWEB) ........................................................................ 21 3. Command Technical Data .......................................................................................................... 21

C. Legacy to MBPS Alignment ............................................................................................................ 24 Appendix A – Enterprise Technical Reference Framework White Paper ................................................. 25 Appendix B - Digital Transformation Data Plan ........................................................................................ 26 Appendix C - Digital Transformation Workforce Plan ............................................................................... 27 Appendix D - Digital Transformation Logistics Services Plan .................................................................... 28 Appendix E - Digital Transformation Application Portfolio Plan .............................................................. 29 Figure 1 - Digital Log IT Enterprise Technical Reference Framework ......................................................... 4 Figure 2 – Potential MBPS Data Standards ................................................................................................. 6 Figure 3 - Logistics Services .......................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 4 – MBPS Operational View ............................................................................................................ 10 Figure 5 - MBPS Maintenance Scenario ..................................................................................................... 10 Figure 6 - MBPS Core Capabilities .............................................................................................................. 12 Figure 7 – Navy Product Data Model ......................................................................................................... 18 Figure 8 – Logistics Products, Processes and Systems .............................................................................. 19 Figure 9 – CDMD-OA Strategic Data Flow ................................................................................................. 20 Figure 10 – CDMD-OA Data Flow ............................................................................................................... 20 Figure 11 – RADWEB Data Flow ................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 12 – CTD Data Flow ......................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 13 – MBPS to Legacy Systems ......................................................................................................... 24


I. Scope This Technical Supplement describes the Navy’s high level requirements for the Model-Based Product Support (MBPS). II. Strategic Intent

Naval platforms and weapons systems are costly to maintain and the cost to deliver and sustain readiness is increasing1. This is due in part to a lack of an integrated and comprehensive decision-making environment, which allows product data, requirements, forecasts, costs, performance, and constraints to mutually inform one another across the product lifecycle and product support elements. In addition, the integrated decision-making environment must be available early in the weapon system lifecycle to enable mission and cost effective design decisions. A Government Accountability Office (GAO) study1 emphasized that affordability solutions should be focused on early design decisions that affect Operations and Support (O&S) costs, which are estimated to be about 70 - 80% of Total Ownership Cost (TOC). The study demonstrated that by the time a program reaches its critical design review, 85% of Operations and Support (O&S) costs are committed as a result of a program’s early design decisions.

To date, the Department of Defense’s (DoD) limited investment in technologies to address this issue has not yet resulted in a viable and readily repeatable capability that enables programs and program portfolios to understand the TOC and readiness impacts of early design decisions and thus maximize design affordability. A Navy sponsored study2 of the issue revealed that an integrated Model-Based Product Support (MBPS) capability that enables enterprise readiness analytics and decision support is the most viable solution. MBPS capabilities will enable programs in the early design phase to support trade-off studies with known impacts to TOC and readiness. Further, the capability will be readily leveraged throughout the program’s life cycle, so that programs can continuously make decisions that meet the Fleet’s current and future readiness requirements at the lowest TOC possible. MBPS will also provide the Fleet with deployable readiness analytics decision support and digitally threaded product and technical data3 services to improve decision making and lean support operations.

Additionally, the absence of a centrally sponsored MBPS with a commonly defined and enforced system and data architecture has resulted in a proliferation of non-standard MBPS solutions across the Navy. To enable enterprise readiness analytics, an enterprise MBPS service that enables programs to acquire and manage product support data / information within a single, structured, authoritative product information backbone is needed. Further, a closed-loop enterprise MBPS approach enables the system’s digital twin to be validated by the physical performance of the object to consistently increase the sophistication in digital representations and their fidelity to the physical world. These capabilities are foundational towards providing

1 GAO Study GAO-03-57 2 ePLM IDE Joint Services BCA 3 Technical data is the information, other than software as defined, which is required for the design, development, production, manufacture, assembly, operation, repair, testing, maintenance or modification of defense articles. Thus, a MIL-STD-31000 Technical Data Package (TDP) is merely one subset of Technical Data.


viable edge decision support capabilities to the fleet and improving decision making, which is critical to combat effectiveness. As such, MBPS is a critical combat multiplier and key to realizing significant improvements in the effectiveness of logistics operations in combat. III. Enterprise MBPS Requirement

A. Enterprise Technical Reference Framework MBPS capabilities are an integral part of the Navy’s Logistics Information Technology (Log IT) portfolio and will be integrated into the Log IT architecture, the Enterprise Technical Reference Framework (ETRF). The vision of the ETRF, Figure 1, is to enable and accelerate the overall objectives of Digital Transformation within the Navy’s Log IT portfolio. The ETRF provides a Log IT architecture that will generate scalable, interoperable, flexible and fluid technology solutions; maximizing access to information / data via applications anywhere, on any device at any time. Solution Papers and Technical Demonstrations shall identify strategies and approaches that depict how the presented MBPS solution will be effectively and affordably integrated within the ETRF. A more thorough description is provided in Appendix A, The ETRF White Paper.

Figure 1 - Digital Log IT Enterprise Technical Reference Framework

1. ETRF Guiding Principles The following ETRF guiding principles define the foundation of the new technology platform that will fulfill the vision and objectives of Digital Transformation within the Log IT portfolio:


Digital Transformation - Replace legacy logistics systems and optimally consolidate the number of IT systems and utilize a common access point, ideated with human centered design principles in mind. Shared Services Model - Adopt a functional domain driven design and micro services architecture approach to establish a shared services operating model and position the platform to create innovative cross-domain products and services. Cloud, Ashore, Afloat - Adopt a containerized cloud and edge posture utilizing a consistent technology stack to seamlessly extend Log IT capabilities across shipyards, ships and submarines including detached operations. Security and Audit - Establish a robust framework for automated governance and compliance using integrated DevSecOps strictly adherent to the Risk Management Framework (RMF), enabling mandates for continuous, proactive monitoring and defense.

2. ETRF Requirements To enable ETRF guiding principles, the following requirements will be continually emphasized for each NAVSEA 06L Navy MBPS prototype: Enables the adoption of domain driven micro services and containerization to build a highly scalable platform promoting automated DevSecOps and scaled Agile Methodology. Enables enforcement of data governance and facilitates automated compliance strictly adherent to RMF and rapidly achieving Authority to Operate (ATO). Enables an integrated enterprise data platform that is scalable to thousands of data sources and millions of data points while enabling real time decision making in a highly immersive customer experience that leverages Mobility and Artificial Intelligence (AI). Enables a technology stack across cloud and edges. The principles of communicating information and syncing data exclusively via application program interfaces (APIs) will ensure that the cloud and edges remain consistent and complement each other’s capabilities.

• Consistent Technology Stack: a traditional hyperconverged infrastructure (HCI) solution, standardizing DevOps tooling, APIs, Resource Management, and Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) / Platform as a Service (Paas) / Data as a Service (DaaS) consistency with a cloud solution • Minimize Ashore Footprint: Support serverless posture at the edge, minimizing memory and processing foot prints for submarines, ships and expeditionary units. Support the application of cloud optimized AI algorithms, on limited data sets available for deployed solutions • Analytics and AI at the Edge: Support analysis on cloud native technologies which can be seamlessly synced with enterprise cloud • Opportunistic Data Exchange: Support prioritized data interchange between the enterprise cloud and the edge, based on network bandwidth and criticality of the business capability serviced


B. Digital Transformation Data Plan The Digital Transformation Data Plan (Appendix B) outlines efforts to eliminate data silos and streamline capabilities enabling useful insight to be gleaned from data. These insights will inform readiness and logistics decisions driving the ideal “Digital Navy.” Currently, thousands of data sources exist in pockets across the Navy. The key goal of the Digital Transformation Data Plan is to promote transparency of data throughout its lifecycle. This document provides actionable goals aligned to people, processes, and technology changes, coupled with best practices in data governance and management. The goals are derived from pain points and information collected from continuous dialogue and analysis. Ultimately, this plan drives to create trustworthy, auditable, and accessible information visible where and when it needs to be. Additionally, to promote data integration and reuse across the enterprise the Navy will use, to the greatest extent possible, industry data standards. Figure 2 depicts typical industry model-based data standards that may potentially be leveraged by the Navy. Data management is a critical enterprise MBPS enabler, so the strategies and requirements depicted in the data plan shall be considered as integral components of MBPS Other Transaction (OT) solutions and addressed in Solution Papers and Technical Demonstrations.

Figure 2 – Potential MBPS Data Standards

C. Digital Transformation Workforce Plan Multiple external and internal imperatives are pushing Navy Log IT to rapidly adopt advanced technology and make significant leaps toward digital maturity. Moving to digital is no longer an option, but a necessity. The Logistics Functional Area Manager (LOG FAM) must take decisive and transformative steps to ensure its workforce is ready to enable and sustain this change. The Digital Transformation Workforce Plan (Appendix C) provides an


approach to guide the transformation of the workforce and the work culture, that support the future vision of a digital Navy. Re-skilling the workforce must happen within a broader framework of managing this enterprise wide change. Technological transformation cannot be successful in isolation, so there are several areas that need to work in tandem for a holistic journey towards digital. The Digital Transformation Team (DTT) has identified five work streams requiring change to enable the overall digital transformation:

• Logistics Services • Data • Technology

• Security • Change Management

Equipping the workforce with relevant skills and experience in these areas is a pre-requisite for triggering the transformation. To support workforce transformation, the strategies and requirements in the Digital Workforce Plan shall be considered as integral components of MBPS OT solutions and addressed in Solution Papers and Technical Demonstrations. D. Enterprise MBPS Overview

1. Logistics Services Services create a direct tangible link from the operational mission to the IT architecture supporting it. Leading organizations are adopting Service Strategy and Service Management principles to better define these links and ensure they are capturing the maximum investment value. The Logistics Services Plan (Appendix D) provides artifacts and guidance to translate mission needs into logistics capabilities (services), user experiences, and functional scenarios necessary to achieve desired logistics outcomes. The plan ensures mission and user needs are the main drivers behind the Navy’s digital transformation effort and move from the current state challenges to the future state. MBPS primarily aligns to Design Integration shared services which are critical enablers of the Supply Chain Management (SCM); Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO); Planning; and Job Support services. Therefore, strategies and requirements depicted in the Logistics Services Plan shall be considered as integral components of MBPS Other Transaction (OT) solutions and addressed in Solution Papers and Technical Demonstrations. The framework supports the delivery of logistics services (Figure 3) to provide the fleet with the following mission outcomes: Materiel and Shore Readiness

• Reduced failure rate • Improved repair time • Improved resupply time and accuracy • Affordable sustainment • Mission capable and secure facilities

Service Experience • Simplified and expedited decision making • Integrated and dynamic work prioritization


• Digitally enabled training and collaboration • Easy and intuitive user experience / interface

Figure 3 - Logistics Services

2. Navy Model-Based Product Support Principles MBPS serves two principal roles within the Logistics Services framework. First, it

provides a single, structured, authoritative product information backbone to anchor materiel readiness services and outcomes to the program’s core systems engineering processes. The key enabling construct of the MBPS is a serialized, or item unique identification (IUID), digital thread capability that efficiently and effectively results in a high degree of data / information associativity, effectivity and traceability. The MBPS digital thread provides the foundation for realizing its benefits across the enterprise. The digital thread enables the enterprise Log IT solution to construct serialized digital twins both across a system’s lifecycle and across logical / operational groupings of systems. This bi-directional coupling of data across the enterprise enables tactical, operational and strategic decision support, detachable and deployable logistics services, and configuration-based automated distribution of digital technical and product data to enhance maintenance and supply operations. Therefore, data / information associativity, effectivity, traceability and other critical data management services are key requirements for realizing Materiel and Shore Readiness and Service Experience mission outcomes and shall be addressed in Solution Papers and Technical Demonstrations.

Secondly, MBPS is the principle driver towards realizing Digital Transformation Materiel Readiness at Cost objectives. Integrating a modeling and simulation-based approach to supportability analysis within the systems engineering process, MBPS enables acquisition programs to design and sustain equipment and logistics service solutions to meet fleet readiness and cost objectives. MBPS also enables programs to embed readiness at cost models as critical components of the system’s digital twin, which provides the foundation for continuous performance monitoring and enhances


decision support services when integrated with enterprise data analytics capabilities. Because of the enterprise solution’s dependency on MBPS services, careful consideration must be given to MBPS requirements to ensure they fully enable enterprise logistics services. 3. Model-based Product Support Operational View

Figure 4 provides the operational view of the MBPS requirement, and its relationship to the ETRF, other LogIT capabilities (i.e. NOBLE, ERP and NMMES); and to the acquisition community. The acquisition community, which consist of the Systems Commands, Program Executive Offices (depicted bottom right), and Sustaining Engineering Activities (depicted top left) are the primary day-to-day users of the cloud-based NPDM, NCRM and NDART capabilities. These organizations principally participate in systems engineering activities with Original Equipment Manufacturers (depicted bottom right) to: design, validate/verify, and sustain system Readiness at Cost strategies, plans, designs and requirements (NCRM); define the Product and Technical Data Model Acquisition contractual requirements (NDART) required to support Readiness at Cost requirements; and receive, configuration manage, distribute and sustain OEM Product and Technical Data Models. The government SYSCOM, PEO and Sustaining Engineering organizations are geographically dispersed with limited network capacities to meet the expected significant computing requirements necessary to support cloud-based modeling and simulation and 3D model management requirements.

Further, MBPS will provide the Product and Technical Data Models needed to support shore and shipboard maintenance, overhaul and alteration operations. As indicated in Figures 4 (depicted top right) and 5, shipboard, to include deployed expeditionary units, maintenance and supply operations will be executed via NOBLE applications integrated within ETRF instances deployed shipboard. Shore based depot and intermediate maintenance operations, also geographically dispersed and principally tied to the cloud-based ETRF instance, are executed by NMMES-TR with shore wholesale and retail supply operations being supported by Navy ERP (both depicted top left on Figure 4).

To support the above Navy Log IT operational requirements the Navy desires that solution papers and technical demonstrations present enterprise solutions that affordably address the following: recommended cloud architecture and computing requirements to affordably maximize performance of the Navy’s cloud-based Readiness at Cost modeling and simulation / predictive analytics capability; recommended cloud architecture and computing requirements to minimize latency related with checking out, changing, and checking in large files, such as computer-aided designs, from minutes to seconds; recommended approaches to define, execute, and test integration requirements internally across MBPS capabilities and externally to the ETRF and other LogIT applications such as NOBLE; recommended software and cloud architecture requirements to support automated distribution of product and technical data models based on triggers and meta data from MBPS capabilities, specifically configuration management, as depicted in Figures 4 and 5.


Figure 4 – MBPS Operational View

Figure 5 - MBPS Maintenance Scenario


4. Legacy Program Rationalization Information for Legacy Log IT systems that will be rationalized by MBPS capabilities

is provided in Section IV of this document. OTA Solution Papers and Technical Demonstrations shall document legacy program rationalization best-value strategies and approaches; to include data migration, training, etc., that rapidly reduce Navy investments in legacy programs. To this end, the Navy desires to use prototypes to develop sound business and technical approaches to rationalize legacy enterprise Log IT (Log IT) capabilities. Core to that approach will be the development of a jointly developed industry-government MBPS Rationalization Plan. The MBPS Rationalization Plan will be based on business and technical analyses of enterprise legacy applications and Digital Transformation Objectives. It will also document the best-value rationalization approach for each with defined enterprise Log IT benefits. Guidance for developing the NAVSEA 06L MBPS Rationalization Plan is provided in the Application Portfolio Plan, Appendix E, with the minimal rationalization criteria defined below: Eliminate redundancy through platform standardization Align system criticality to service levels Upgrade systems past end of service life Enhance / Replace High Incident Critical Applications Consolidate systems with multiple instances Explore COTS to supplant heavily customized solutions Reduce interface complexity to simplify the enterprise environment Further, the analytical process and development of rationalization approaches should explore the full range of material and non-material solutions

IV. MBPS Capabilities and Requirements A. Capability Overview MBPS provides a single, structured, authoritative product information environment to: anchor materiel readiness and affordability outcomes to the program’s core systems engineering processes and products; and enable a systems engineering approach to design, deliver and sustain Fleet wartime materiel readiness and affordability objectives. SEA06L’s MBPS and IT Rationalization effort modernizes NAVSEA’s Technical Data, Configuration and Log IT systems to provide core MBPS capabilities that enable critical MBPS and LogIT Digital Transformation objectives. A description of the enterprise MBPS’s core capabilities is provided below and depicted in Figure 6. The Navy desires to use MBPS OT prototypes to develop and integrate these core capabilities to provide a single, structured, authoritative MBPS service in support of LogIT Digital Transformation objectives. Navy Product Data Management (NPDM), which provides the following capabilities:

• To provide a single, authoritative system baseline and configuration management service • To provide the capability to design, deliver, and sustain products that enable affordable readiness (drawings, EOSS, Tech Pubs)

Navy Common Readiness Model (NCRM), which provides the following capabilities:


• To provide a common affordable readiness modeling and simulation capability that enables programs and product support providers to design, deliver and sustain affordable readiness. • To provide a single, authoritative source of product support source data to enable development of other product support services (provisioning, support equipment, technical publications, etc.).

Navy Data Acquisition Requirements Tool (NDART) to provide a web-based capability to develop Statement of Work (SOWs), Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs), and Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) to procure technical / product data informed by system / platform lifecycle phase and product support strategy.

To ensure affordability and sustainability, the government desires that design alternatives that address the above capabilities are drawn from the full range of material and non-material alternatives with decisions that balance impacts to acquisition cost, sustainment cost, schedule and performance equally.

Figure 6 - MBPS Core Capabilities

B. MPBS System Level Requirements The solution shall utilize the Government Cloud and the Navy Enterprise Technical Reference Framework (ERTF) to the maximum extent possible. Solution(s) are desired to consist of COTS products to the maximum extent possible. The solution shall be able to support classification of data up to Impact Level 6. Solution(s) should be capable of scaling to support over 1,000 ashore and afloat installations worldwide and over 150,000 users.


The solution(s) may adhere to Human Systems Integration (HSI) guidelines provided as part of the Government’s HSI guidance document. Solution(s) shall demonstrate the ability to be DoD cyber authorized (Authority to Operate) (ATO). Solution(s) shall be capable of providing single user sign-on entry utilizing Common Access Card (CAC) / Public Key Infrastructure (PKI). Solution(s) should provide the ability for Personal Identity Verification (PIV) credentials with role based applications embedded. Solution(s) should demonstrate ability to meet Payment Card Industry (PCI) compliance controls. The solution(s) shall demonstrate ability to integrate multiple platforms into a holistic environment, accessible via industry standard Application Program Interfaces (API). The solution(s) shall demonstrate Disconnected, Disrupted, Intermittent, and Limited (D-DIL) operations. The solution(s) shall demonstrate distance support by providing application functionality via an Enterprise system to remotely provide reactive, proactive, and predictive logistics support to Naval Operational Forces, including performing local functions remotely via appropriate roles. The solution(s) shall demonstrate application functionality via an Enterprise system to remotely provide reactive, proactive, and predictive logistics support to Naval Operational Forces, including performing local functions remotely via appropriate roles. The solution(s) shall demonstrate the ability to use mobile computing devices (e.g. Smart Phone, tablets, mobile printers etc.) (interdependencies between MBPS subcomponents at large). The solution(s) shall demonstrate a common look and feel to the system thus reducing the number of entry points to appropriately consolidated applications based on application operating environment requirements (ashore, afloat, expeditionary). The solution(s) should be able to connect to Navy classified and unclassified networks as well as receive and transmit classified / unclassified information. The solution(s) shall provide connected and disconnected training solutions providing the knowledge and skills for all Users and System Administrators to operate and maintain the system. The training solution(s) shall provide interactive Computer Based Training to support "Role Based" training (defined as the Role (clerk, supervisor, etc.) to the appropriate Community (i.e. Stores Clerk for Logistics Specialist (LS) rating). The Role Based training products shall provide at least 80% of the required training for the specific role, be integrated to allow for usage from any current Navy and USMC workstation, and will allow permission to the appropriate NOBLE system upon completion. The training completion process is expected to be provided by an 'Access Control' function. The connected training solution(s) shall include a training environment, with redundancy, that allows Internet access 24/7 and will also report to the NOBLE Access Control application the course completion metric for granting of Role Based permissions to the NOBLE system.


Applicable role based training and access control in a disconnected environment shall be provided. A synchronizing / replication mechanism for access shall be enabled when reconnected to update an authoritative User database at the connected web based system. The solution(s) should have User and System Administrator guides deployed with disconnected users.

C. MBPS Business Needs and Requirements

1. Navy Product Data Management (NPDM) a) Principle Business Needs Manage (develop, receive, store, export) or integrate product definition data

and information (technical data and information such as CAD, Bills of Material, Requirements, Specifications, documents, etc.) so that all functional areas of the product team have access to the engineering data required to design and deliver product support. The primary data standard is MIL-STD-31000 Series, Technical Data Packages.

Provide collaborative model-based program and project management business capabilities to enhance a program's ability to meet its business, schedule, quality, risk and technical requirements; associate objects to the program’s product structure; and provide configuration management as part of the system’s baseline.

Provide the capability for programs to acquire, sustain and publish Technical Data (e.g. Operational Sequencing, Technical Manuals and Planned Maintenance System (PMS)) with full data associativity, traceability and effectivity across the MBPS and Log IT enterprise solutions.

Provide a collaborative knowledge management environment with access and visibility to required program information and traceable environment digital communications for all program team members.

Provide the capability to develop and manage enterprise level workflows and provide business intelligence reporting to track workflow and business process status.

b) Description Classic COTS PDM / Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) environment

(hosted within a cloud architecture) to manage the following data types: • Technical Data Package (TDP) management • Configuration Management • Configuration Status Accounting • Document Management, Workflow and Collaboration • 3D Models • 2D Drawings • Manufacturing Processes • Requirements • Workflows


• Business Intelligence / Reporting An integrated standards based (S1000D) environment for developing and

publishing technical data. The primary data standard is S1000D (to include training) and other applicable aspects of the S Series Specification Specifications. • Technical Publications • Preventive Maintenance Instructions • Training integration

c) Benefits Establishes common / modern product model environment for current and

future programs to acquire and sustain procured TDPs. Establishes configuration and data / model reuse tied to a common readiness

model (integrates with NCRM capability), publications, and logistics / maintenance source data from program inception.

Establishes foundation and “source” for additive manufacturing. Establishes the “physical” component of Model Based Systems Engineering

(MBSE). Establishes integrated capability with configuration, models / drawings,

training, and logistics / maintenance data (digital twin / thread). Establishes commercial standard for procuring modular publication and

training data (develop once, use many). Establishes and manages the digital twin and digital thread of the system.

d) Top Level Requirements (TRLs): TLRs and associated functional requirements will be provided separately with a zip file of the SySML and UML models.

2. Navy Common Readiness Model (NCRM) a) Principle Business Needs Enable the use of modeling and simulation technologies to apply a systems

engineering approach to supportability analysis to optimally design and sustain the system and its support by decomposing, allocating, verifying, validating and realizing system readiness (and each of its components) and affordability requirements.

Readily enable fleet mission planners to aggregate system readiness at cost models to develop complex system, ship, strike / task group and fleet models that aligned to their applicable warfare area(s).

Readily enable fleet mission planners to analyze and develop long term maintenance resource plans to affordably sustain Fleet mission readiness requirements for applicable operational plans.

Enable fleet mission maintenance planners to rapidly disaggregate / aggregate task organized models to analyze, develop, execute and monitor maintenance resource plans for pending / ongoing operations to affordably sustain mission readiness requirements.


Enable material condition reporting to the Navy’s readiness reporting system by receiving system component failure indicators from various sources (e.g. system sensors, maintenance information system, fault monitoring algorithms, etc.) and report mission readiness based on the end effect to mission(s) documented in the Fault Mode Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) for all related fault modes within the system / aggregated Readiness at Cost model.

Using system requirements and Readiness at Cost Model predicted mission and design outcomes, deploy a Failure Reporting and Root Cause Analysis System (FRACAS) to continuously monitor performance and conduct root cause analysis across all components of readiness and affordability traceable to the system / product support design elements that enable them (e.g. fault detection / fault isolation software, Remaining Useful Life (RUL) algorithms, component reliability, etc.).

Deploy enterprise cloud / edge advanced data analytics decision support services to enable fleet and support activities to continuously improve performance, agility, responsiveness, and scale of supply chain, maintenance and support operations.

Provide the capability for programs to acquire and sustain Maintenance Task Analysis data with full data associativity, traceability and effectivity across the MBPS and Log IT enterprise solutions. The primary data standards are S3000L, S2000M and other applicable aspects of the S Series Specification or GEIA-STD-0007.

Provide the ability for programs to acquire and sustain service bills of materials with full data associativity, traceability and effectivity across the MBPS and Log IT enterprise solutions.

Provide the ability for programs to acquire and sustain provisioning and cataloging data with full data associativity, traceability and effectivity across the MBPS and Log IT enterprise solutions.

b) Description Readiness model created at program inception and utilized through the life

cycle (design reviews, fleet readiness, predictive maintenance / supply, etc.). Enables ability to create Availability and Cost Optimization Model using / integrated with: • FMECA • Reliability Block Diagram (RBD) • Multi-echelon Readiness Based Sparing (RBS) • Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) • O&S Cost optimization • R&M Predictions • FRACAS


Data Analytics integrated with modeling and simulation to enable performance monitoring, reporting and mission materiel readiness at cost decision support.

Environment for the development and storage of maintenance and supply source data for use in technical publications, supply, and maintenance activities. • Logistics Product Data (LPD) or Logistics Support Analysis Record (LSAR)

consisting of Maintenance Task Analysis and Provisioning Technical Documentation (PTD)

c) Benefits Connects readiness model to configuration as a part of overarching digital

twin effort. Establishes integrated capability between configuration and readiness

modeling from program inception – eliminating model accuracy issues. Enables point and time and predictive mission readiness including

maintenance, supply, and manpower from a single model. Enables programs to assess availability and cost requirements throughout

the requirements design process. Establishes integrated capability with configuration, training, and technical

publications to ensure logistics and maintenance source data is never out of sync (digital thread).

Establishes logistics / maintenance source data once to be used many times in publications, training, and enterprise supply / maintenance systems.

d) Top Level Requirements: TLRs and associated functional requirements will be provided separately with a zip file of the SySML and UML models.

3. Navy Data Acquisition Requirements Tool (NDART) a) Principle Business Needs Enforce common data standards, requirements, and acquisition approaches

across all Navy weapon system acquisition contracts to: • Enable seamless integration of product data models from Original

Equipment Manufacturers PLM systems into the Navy’s MBPS system • Support Log IT’s Data Management objectives

Provide simplified, prompted solution that enables users to develop Statements of Work (SOWs), Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs), and Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) to acquire product data models, Figure 7, based on system / platform, lifecycle phase, and acquisition strategy.

b) Description Application that enables to users to enter program, product support and

product data model parameters to produce a contract SOW, CDRLs and DIDs to acquire the product data model components needed to support the program’s product support strategy.


c) Benefits Establishes common standards / requirements for use in contracts to

successfully procure technical data for use in a modern PLM environment. d) Top Level Requirements: TLRs and associated functional requirements will be provided separately with a zip file of the SySML and UML models.

Figure 7 – Navy Product Data Model

V. Legacy Application Overview A. Legacy System Overview NAVSEA 06L’s legacy Log IT systems, Figure 8, play a critical role in mission readiness for NAVSEA platforms and systems by providing the following capabilities: Provides an authoritative Configuration Status Accounting tool and configuration

data source. Acquire, store, retrieve and view technical documentation by providing a central

point of access to technical data for use by the Navy to include Planned Maintenance System and Engineering Operational Sequencing System (EOSS) information.

Enable a single authoritative source to store, retrieve and view issued Naval ships’ drawings.


Figure 8 – Logistics Products, Processes and Systems

B. Legacy System Descriptions 1. Configuration Data Manager’s Database - Open Architecture (CDMD-OA) CDMD-OA is the authoritative configuration status accounting data source for all Navy ship platforms and shore sites. It provides critical support for all Fleet maintenance and modernization efforts, shipboard system’s replication storage, shipboard allowance generation, equipment standardization initiatives, cross-platform weapons systems analysis (make, model, series), ship material condition metrics generation, preventative and corrective maintenance reporting and shipboard logistics product load-out. It also maintains the correct ship spares allowances and enables the successful scheduling and reporting of maintenance transactions. Policy support is identified under D0D 5000 (series), SECNAV 5000.2, OPNAV INST 5450.340, MIL-HDBK-61, NAVSEA 4130.12B, NAVSEA Technical Specification 9090.700 (series). Figures 9 and 10 depict CDMD-OA data flows. CDMD-OA has the following capabilities: Provides shipboard logistics product load-out for approximately 4700 users. Tracks the status of installed systems, equipment and their related logistics items

on U.S. Naval and foreign military ships and shore activities. Provides accurate configuration for ship, shore and Expeditionary Forces

maintained in CDMD-OA and triggers the correct allowances of spares, test equipment, PMS documents and system / equipment technical documentation.

Consists of a distributed database with remote site servers hosting individual CDM databases that replicate data to a Central servers located at CEDC Charleston SC under SPAWAR.

Provides a complete view of all ships and shore sites, via a central repository, for which configuration status accounting and readiness reporting is based.


Transmits configuration data to NAVSUP WSS for supply and allowance allocation, in addition to all supply and configuration data to the shipboard systems.

Transmits configuration data to 20 other DON activities from ERP to NBIS, NAVSUP, MFOM as more in providing configuration data.

Figure 9 – CDMD-OA Strategic Data Flow

Figure 10 – CDMD-OA Data Flow


2. Revised Alternative Data Flow WEB (RADWEB) The Revised Alternative Dataflow Web site (RADWEB) acts as the electronic conduit through which shipboard and shore site allowance update and system / equipment maintenance history data files are passed among various activities (NAVSUP / NAVSUP WSS, NAVSEA, SPAWAR, NAVAIR, Warfare Centers, Regional Maintenance Centers, and Fleet Forces Command and Fleet Operational Units). RADWEB enables configuration, maintenance and allowance data transfer between ship and shore. CDMD-OA configuration data, ERP allowancing data and 3M maintenance reporting transactional data are replicated and exchanged thru RADWEB generated Automated Shore Interface (ASI) files between shipboard maintenance and logistics data systems (OMMS-NG / SNAP / R-SUPPLY / AWN/SSB) to ensure data synchronization and currency and supports approximately 3500 users. The RADWEB strategic data flow is depicted in Figure 11. Policy is supported under D0D 5000 (series), SECNAV 5000.2, OPNAV INST 5450.340, MIL-HDBK-61, NAVSEA 4130.12B, NAVSEA Technical Specification 9090.700 (series).

Figure 11 – RADWEB Data Flow

3. Command Technical Data The Command Technical Data (CTD) Program supports the Navy’s technical data and documentation requirements. The strategic data flow for CTD is depicted in Figure 12.

RADWEB Strategic Data Flow

CDMD-OACENTRAL

NSLCSystem to

system requests

User CAC/PIV

RADWEBASI REQUEST

RADWEBASI DOWNLOAD

AUTOMATEDMANUAL

ASIStore & Forward

CEDC Hosted


Figure 12 – CTD Data Flow

Command Tech Data consists of the following systems:

a) Advanced Technical Information System (ATIS). ATIS is the primary system for shipboard storage, access, and display of (Technical Manuals (TMs) and drawings. ATIS is available on NIAPS, stand-alone, and client-server versions and used on all afloat platforms and ~200 shore activities with approximately 1000 users. Provides the capability to display technical manuals, engineering drawings, and other book-type documents stored in digital form on CDs. ATIS supports four primary functional areas: configuration, library, display, and support. The configuration functional area contains the databases and modules that allow the user to identify technical data. The library functional area contains the databases and modules that define what technical data is available, and allows the user access to view this data by drawing number, drawing title, publication ID, or publication title. The display functional area contains the module that initiates the display of TMs, Engineering Drawings (EDs), and other book-type documents. The support functional area allows the system administrator to manage ATIS users accounts, passwords, data, and databases.

b) Technical Data Management Information System (TDMIS). TDMIS provides tech manual / documentation configuration and lifecycle management and enables users to research and view selected TMs. TDMIS supports 5000 – 10,000 users with the following functions: Assign publication, volume Identification (Vol ID), or stock number information support with history view screens.


Assign product numbers to Technical Manuals (e.g., Technical Manual Identification Number, Volume Identification). Maintains and tracks Tech Manual Deficiency Reports and Evaluation. Provides Technical Manual Management Activity POC, stocking point, and other information search screens. Provides ship hull / class or configuration-to-TM search screens. Generate and retrieve various reports, including Indexes of Technical Publications. Library, outfitting, and distribution information management.

c) Streamlined Modular Acquisition Requirements Tailoring Tool (SMART-T). SMART-T provides a fast, easy, and accurate means for defining tailored TM acquisition and development requirements with the following capabilities: Generate Technical Manual Contract Requirements (TMCRs) and Technical Manual SEATASK Requirements (TMSRs). TM requirements conform to NAVSEA-approved specifications, standards, and NAVSEA TM Management Program (TMMP) policy. The generated TMCR / TMSR is intended for use in a Solicitation, Contract, Task / Delivery Order, or Government Agency tasking. Used by acquisition activities, developers, and reviewers to view TMCRs / TMSRs from the SMART-T Repository.

d) NAVLOG Technical Data Repository System (NAVLOGTD). NAVLOGTD is the authoritative data repository used to develop, edit, publish, distribute and view technical data for EOSS, PMS, and Technical Manuals. NAVLOGTD supports ~3,500 registered users and ~800 editors for all component applications with the following capabilities: Provides EOSS for new construction ships and systems. Hosts the source data for the development, update, and distribution of PMS products to include Maintenance Index Pages (MIPs) and Maintenance Requirement Card (MRCs). Supports the development and distribution of Hull, Mechanical, and Electrical (HM&E) TMs.

e) Naval Ships Engineering Drawing Repository (NSEDR). NSEDR stores and maintains all Naval ship drawings utilized by planning yards, Fleet activities, Naval Surface Warfare Centers, Systems Commands, In-Service Engineering Agents, etc. The NAVSEA-specific Repository under the Joint Engineering Data Management Information and Control System (JEDMICS) program with the following capabilities: DoD-wide Web-based Internet system containing all NAVSEA Non-sensitive (Non-U-NNPI) drawings. Accessible by US Government employees and contractors who have an official data agreement with the DoD and have a need-to-know for US Navy Ships’ EDs.


Holds all approved and issued drawings from the consolidation of all NAVSEA JEDMICS sites.

C. Legacy to MBPS Alignment Figure 13 depicts the alignment from MBPS capabilities to the Legacy Systems they will

potentially rationalize.

Figure 13 – MBPS to Legacy Systems


Appendix A – Enterprise Technical Reference Framework White Paper Enterprise Technical Reference Framework White Paper

Adobe Acrobat Document


Appendix B - Digital Transformation Data Plan Digital Transformation Data Plan



Appendix C - Digital Transformation Workforce Plan

Digital Transformation Workforce Plan



Appendix D - Digital Transformation Logistics Services Plan

Digital Transformation Logistics Services Plan



Appendix E - Digital Transformation Application Portfolio Plan

Digital Transformation Application Portfolio Plan


DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION PLAN

1 DRAFT/PRE-DECISIONAL

Digital Transformation

Logistics Services Plan Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Fleet Readiness & Logistics,

Logistics Information Technology (IT) /Logistics Functional Area

Manager (LOGFAM)

5/29/2018



Contents

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ 4

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 5

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 6

Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 6

Scope ..................................................................................................................................... 6

Vision ..................................................................................................................................... 6

Assessment ............................................................................................................................... 7

Assessment Approach ............................................................................................................ 7

Service Challenges................................................................................................................. 8

Findings and Impacts ............................................................................................................. 8

Recommendations.................................................................................................................. 9

Roadmap and Future State .......................................................................................................10

Mission Outcomes .................................................................................................................10

Service Hierarchy ..................................................................................................................11

Personas ...............................................................................................................................12

Human Centered Design .......................................................................................................13

User Experience ....................................................................................................................13

Operating Model ....................................................................................................................13

Current State .........................................................................................................................14

Future State...........................................................................................................................14

Implementation Guidance .........................................................................................................18

Operating Model ....................................................................................................................18

Workforce Architecture – Digital Roles ..................................................................................20

Internal Links in The Digital Transformation Plan ......................................................................21

Enterprise Technical Reference Framework (ETRF) .............................................................21

Data Plan ..............................................................................................................................22

Appendix ...................................................................................................................................23

References ............................................................................................................................23

Federal and Navy Imperatives ...............................................................................................24

DoD Enterprise Service Management Framework, Edition III (DESMF) .............................24

CNO Guidance ..................................................................................................................25

Business Enterprise Architecture 11.1 ...............................................................................26

DON Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................26



National Defense Strategy .................................................................................................27

Industry Best Practices ..........................................................................................................28

KPIs / Metrics .....................................................................................................................28

Digital Logistics Capabilities ...............................................................................................28

Industry Logistics Digital Guiding Principles .......................................................................29

Customer Experience Capabilities .....................................................................................30

Artifact Background and Approach .....................................................................................30

Service Hierarchy ...............................................................................................................31



List of Figures FIGURE 1. LOGISTICS SERVICES PLAN OUTCOMES ............................................................................................ 5

FIGURE 2. SERVICES SUMMARY FROM THE FEBRUARY 2018 LOG IT EXCOMM ................................................ 7

FIGURE 3. MISSION OUTCOMES ..................................................................................................................... 10

FIGURE 4. SERVICE HIERARCHY ..................................................................................................................... 11

FIGURE 5. PERSONA TO DOMAIN MAPPING ..................................................................................................... 12

FIGURE 6. PROGRESSION TO SHARED SERVICES ............................................................................................ 14

FIGURE 7. NAVY LOGISTICS OPERATING MODEL ............................................................................................. 15

FIGURE 8. LEVEL 1 SERVICE TO VECTOR MAPPING ......................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

FIGURE 9. LEVEL 2 SERVICE TO VECTOR MAPPING, 2018 VERSION 1.0 ........................................................... 16

FIGURE 10: FUTURE LOGISTICS READINESS MODEL ........................................................................................ 17

FIGURE 11. NAVY LOGISTICS OPERATING MODEL ........................................................................................... 18

FIGURE 12. CHECKLIST FOR CREATING SERVICES .......................................................................................... 19

FIGURE 13. WORKFORCE ARCHITECTURE....................................................................................................... 20

FIGURE 14. SERVICES ROLE DESCRIPTIONS ................................................................................................... 20

FIGURE 15. SERVICE PLAN AND ETRF INTERSECTION..................................................................................... 21

FIGURE 16. ENTERPRISE TECHNICAL REFERENCE FRAMEWORK (ETRF) ......................................................... 21

FIGURE 17. LOGISTICS SCENARIO WITH DATA INTEGRATION ............................................................................ 22

FIGURE 18. SERVICE PLAN REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 23

FIGURE 19. NOTIONAL SERVICE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FROM DESMF ........................................................... 24

FIGURE 20. SERVICE QUALITY MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................. 25

FIGURE 21. BUSINESS CAPABILITY ACQUISITION CYCLE .................................................................................. 26

FIGURE 22. DIGITAL LOGISTICS CAPABILITIES ................................................................................................. 29

FIGURE 23. CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE CAPABILITIES ........................................................................................ 30

FIGURE 24. SERVICES DESCRIPTIONS ............................................................................................................ 32

FIGURE 25. FULL LIST OF CAPTURED SERVICES ............................................................................................. 33



Executive Summary Services create a direct and tangible link from the operational mission to the information

technology (IT) architecture that supports it. Leading organizations are adopting Service

Strategy and Service Management principles to better define these links and ensure they are

capturing the most value for their investment. The Logistics Services Plan provides the artifacts

and guidance to translate mission needs into logistics capabilities (services), user experiences,

and functional scenarios necessary to achieve desired logistics outcomes. It ensures that

mission and user needs are the main drivers behind Navy’s effort to implement a digital

transformation and move from the current state challenges to the future state.

Implementing a Service Strategy will fundamentally change how Navy Logistics (LOG) IT does

business and is critical to successfully executing an overall digital transformation. Designing an

organization around services creates the framework and guidance to build out the underlying

technology. The Service Plan creates the foundation for this change to be implemented.

Contents are based on extensive input from numerous Navy LOG IT stakeholders and

complements Department of the Navy (DON) goals and Chief of Naval Operations (CNO)

guidance.

Figure 1. Logistics Services Plan Outcomes

This Plan will require the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV), the Navy’s System

Commands (SYSCOMS), their IT program offices and the Fleet to work collectively to make a

Service Strategy a reality. This collaboration and integration will ensure the fundamentals apply

to the entire organization and maximize the value of the digital transformation. Additionally, a

service task list and roles are listed to make the plan actionable. This plan is intended to work in

tandem with other plans from the Digital Transformation Team (DTT).

Current State Future State

IT restricts the mission IT ensures mission accomplishment

Limited ROI on technology initiatives Initiatives make visible impact to mission

Custom solutions for over-specialized services Intentionally designed shared services

Improve system performance Improve warfighter performance



Introduction This Plan is one section from the larger Digital Transformation Plan, compiled as part of Navy

Logistics’ Digital Transformation effort.

Purpose This Service Plan aims address the question of why before the question of how. IT architecture

development often reverses this process and that results in wasted resources and compromised

ability to accomplish the mission. This Service Plan provides guidance useful in defining

strategic objectives, providing direction for growth, prioritizing investments, focusing on the user,

and defining outcomes which ultimately drive the design of a future state operating model. Using

this plan in conjunction with the other plans from the DTT, Navy Logistics will be able to

influence organizational attitudes and culture toward the implementation of a digital

transformation.

A variety of imperatives for the Federal Government, Department of Defense (DoD), and DON

set the foundation for and drive all aspects of this Plan. The Service Plan ensures the goals and

objectives at the highest level will be met by incorporating those themes throughout the design

and implementation process. The following documents were used to build that understanding:

1. National Defense Strategy

2. CNO Design for Maintaining Maritime

Superiority

3. DON Goals and Objectives

4. DoD Enterprise Service Management

Framework

5. DoD Business Enterprise Architecture

Scope By leveraging insight from a current state assessment, the Service Plan translates mission

needs into capabilities across four major functional areas: Supply Chain Management (SCM);

Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO); Product Lifecycle Management (PLM); and Shore /

Facilities. These mission areas encompass the operational and industrial perspectives of

logistics. Maintaining a portfolio level view will enable mission owners, sailors, IT, and other

stakeholders to describe Navy Logistics in a common business terminology, to reduce

redundancy of similar capabilities offered across the various domains, and drive LOG IT

towards shared services.

Vision

“Moving from IT driving the mission to mission driving IT.”

Guiding Principles

1. Everyone is part of the solution

2. This is an iterative process

3. Maintain a portfolio level view

4. Anchor to the mission

5. Be transformative



The overall vision of the Services Plan is to ensure that the mission is driving IT. This means

that the desired result must be defined well before developing the technology that enables it, to

deliver better value. We envision a state where IT does not restrict or limit the mission, instead

accelerates and ensures readiness success. To operationalize this vision, we have leveraged

the ITIL service management framework and the DoD Enterprise Service Management

Framework referenced later in this document.

Assessment Assessment Approach The assessment was a multi-pronged approach that included a survey, as well as in-person and

telephone interviews, site visits and working groups. Surveys were distributed to all the key

LOGIT stakeholders representing Fleet, SYSCOMS and IT program offices. The survey

contained qualitative and quantitative IT strategy, functional and technical questions. 26% of

invitees responded, primarily those at the GS-14 and GS-15 level.

In addition to interviews and ongoing site visits, a regular Logistics Services Working Group was

established with the dual purpose of both collecting information about programs as part of the

assessment, as well as informing stakeholders of the ongoing effort.

The following figure summarized the assessment for the LOG IT EXCOMM and illustrates the

findings, impacts, and recommendations.

Figure 2. Services Summary from the February 2018 LOG IT EXCOMM



Service Challenges The assessment and its follow-on conversations identified several service-related challenges.

This list of challenges, while not exhaustive, represents the most fundamental within Navy

Logistics that manifest themselves as various inefficiencies.

The fundamental challenges are:

1. Users undefined

2. No formal process to define service goals

3. Customer experience inadequate and inconsistent

4. Services overlap causing inefficiencies

5. Services do not align with mission

6. Manual operations

Findings and Impacts Findings: These figures were derived from the responses received in the survey and highlight

the biggest service related issues facing Navy Logistics.

1. 50% collect and analyze user behavior in apps/systems

2. 57% stated that solutions related to customer needs are measured

3. 39% can generate and track value from products and/or services; ROI is not traceable

4. Current systems are organized by organizational entities, creating technical and

functional silos

5. 75% responded that they know who the end user of a system is, but not clearly defined

6. 46% responded that current IT platforms support the digital mission

7. 22% think that the IT Strategy is known and easily accessible by all members across the

organization

8. 65% responded that they do not have the ability to create prototypes

Key Impacts: Based on the findings derived from the survey, the following key impacts describe

the how LOG IT will continue to be affected without change.

1. Return on investment will continue to be minimal which compromises effectiveness.

2. Lack of insight into overall user experience will result in investments not meeting mission

and user needs (i.e., wasting money)

3. Organization’s lack of ability to deliver value-added prototypes, especially as starting

points to large acquisitions will yield waste and aggravate silos

4. Lack of mature integrated technical, data, and workforce capabilities prevent delivery of

the CNO’s desire for predictive maintenance and supply capabilities, as well as Sailor

productivity features (e.g., Mobility + Augmented Reality)

5. The Navy won’t know what they are working towards related to readiness without

exploring something like this. Readiness to different people means different things.

6. Multiple organizations are providing the same capability to their use base creating

redundancies and ineffective use of IT investments.

7. Limited ability to design and test new capabilities as mission and user needs evolve.

8. Users create their own work-arounds, which compromise compliance and data quality.



Recommendations

1. Resource and mandate user experience as a prerequisite for investments.

a. Standardize and incorporate user experience findings as a pre-requisite for

technology improvement and development.

b. Identify and co-implement Human Centered Design training.

c. Develop plan to implement HCD principles and incorporate user feedback

throughout the IT development process.

d. Establish key Customer Segments with corresponding unique needs to drive

standards and more effectively plan for future needs.

2. Define and monitor service communications.

a. Establish a communication plan to increase awareness and adoption of service

artifacts throughout the organization.

b. Establish the roles needed to manage a service-based organization.

c. Assign responsibilities to manage service communications.

3. Implement service transformation in tandem with other capabilities such as data and

technology which forms the basis for the overall digital architecture.

a. Incorporate best practice standards for prototypes and drive policy or training to

implement.

b. Integrate service community with IT program offices to maximize functional and

technology alignment.

4. Manage LOGFAM investments via the service strategy

a. Identify service gaps and redundancies using the Service Hierarchy and align

future acquisitions to address inefficiencies.

b. Continuously collect feedback related to new service models, as well as identify

champions to participate in planning and implementation

c. Improve transparency between logistics services and systems / applications to

simplify portfolio management for the EXCOMM.



Roadmap and Future State In defining the future state, the DTT has focused on four major components:

1. Mission Outcomes: Why we are doing the work

2. Service Hierarchy: What is the work to be done

3. Personas: Who is doing the work

4. Operating Model: How the work is done to accomplish the outcome – from start to finish

The Service Plan provides guidance on how Navy can answer these questions using a service

strategy.

Mission Outcomes To ensure the mission drives logistics capabilities and

investment decisions, the mission and outcomes

must be defined at the outset to ultimately lead to

effective and sustainable readiness. The Mission

Outcomes have four main components:

1. Visible: All programs contribute to enable

these and understand how.

2. Comprehensive: All Transformation pillars

play a role: Service, Data, Tech, Security,

Change

3. Systemic: Integrate within LOG IT governance

and lifecycle processes

4. Anchor: Guide functional and technical artifacts

The Mission Outcomes1 are separated into

two main areas. The Material and Shore

Readiness outcomes reflect the

operational measures related to readiness.

The Service Experience outcomes reflect

the human focused measures. While Navy

Logistics has a solid understanding of

Material and Shore Readiness, there are

significant missed opportunities around

Service Experience which leads to

foundational challenges. To close that gap,

it will be critical to implement Human

Centered Design methodologies with a

focus on customer experience so that user

needs drives design. The Personas

1 Each Mission Outcome has a set of key enablers and is mapped to Level 2 services to identify which services contribute to meeting that outcome.

Sources/Inputs

1. Services Working Group

2. Operational Availability (AO)

a. Reliability

b. Maintainability

c. Supportability 3. CNO Design

4. National Defense Strategy

5. Fleet Design

6. DON Goals, Objectives, Outcomes

Figure 3. Mission Outcomes



section, on page 12, provides a further explanation of these methodologies.

Service Hierarchy The Service Hierarchy captures all the services and

underlying capabilities that Navy Logistics provides to

its end users. The graphic in Figure 4 captures all

Navy Logistics services to help:

1. determine left and right lateral limits for the

implementation of digital capabilities and its

enabling Digital LOG IT Architecture,

2. coordinate changes to mission and or

business capabilities,

3. and enable future governance decisions.

The graphic is purposefully kept at a high level to ensure a strategic mindset at the portfolio

level.2

Figure 4. Service Hierarchy

2 Find a full list of high level services, called Level 1 services, and a description of their detailed services, called Level 2 services, in the appendix.

Sources/Inputs


2. Vector BPR Artifacts

3. Business Enterprise Architecture

(BEA 11.0)

4. Integrated Product Support Elements

5. Industry Logistics Models

6. Digital Pilot

7. OPNAV PLM Working Group



The Service Hierarchy allows leadership to see the logistics world on a page and structure an

organization around services to eliminate redundancies and focus on the value being delivered

to the end users. As the organization moves through the Digital Transformation, the Hierarchy

will be used to map specific applications within the IT architecture to a corresponding service.

This version bridges the current and future state and, as a result, should continue to evolve.

Regularly revising this hierarchy will force decision makers to continually re-evaluate what is

important to the mission and identify future improvements.

Personas An operating model built around shared services must

incorporate Human Centered Design (HCD) methodologies

as a critical component to ensure the LOG IT architecture

captures what the end user needs to accomplish the mission.

By designing around what the end users, or the Personas,

need, the organization increases the design’s rate of

adoption.

Personas are one of the tools used to implement HCD. They define an archetypical user of a

system, an example of the kind of person who would interact with a certain system. More

importantly, however, Personas use services to deliver mission outcomes. The following list

maps Personas to more specific services, called Level 2 services, and serves as a starting point

for employing Human Centered Design methodologies in the Digital Transformation.

Figure 5. Persona to Domain Mapping

Sources/Inputs


2. Vector BPR Artifacts

3. DTT Workshops

4. Digital Pilot



Human Centered Design Navy Logistics is adopting Human Centered Design (HCD) to meet changing user and mission

needs. HCD is an overarching framework of processes which integrates a set of tools,

methodologies and practices to ensure that a product, service or program design captures the

users’, i.e., the sailors’, needs, wants, and limitations. HCD can improve strategic decision

making as well as increase the effectiveness of individual programs and services.

HCD focuses on:

1. People, by designing with a deep empathy for the users,

2. Processes, by using a framework of creative processes based around design and

innovation,

3. and Technology, by selecting technologies which enhance the user’s experience.

HCD is a continuous process of centring user needs and the mission to drive effective solutions.

It requires a standard approach and processes that allow the organization to easily and

consistently gather, analyze, understand data to act and react to changes in mission or user

needs.

User Experience To implement HCD methodologies, Navy Logistics is incorporating user experience capabilities

into the design process for technical innovation and refresh. Below is a list of conceptual user

experience capabilities.

1. User Insight, or the set of practices required to create a clear, consistent, and accurate

picture of user experiences, keeping a constant pulse on changing expectations.

2. User Experience Strategy, or the set of practices required to define a clear vision of the

experience the organization seeks to deliver, linking it to the organization’s mission.

3. User Experience Design, or the set of practices required to determine the end-to-end

user experience across services and channels based on mission needs.

4. User Centric Organization and Governance, or the set of practices required to monitor,

manage, and enable the implementation and execution of a consistent set of user

experiences across multiple services.

5. User Experience Measurement, or the set of practices required to measure user

experience quality on an ongoing basis across the entire LOG FAM and the use of that

data to drive continuous improvement.

6. User Centric Culture, or the programs, communications and training required to create

and maintain a culture with a focus on user experience embedded.

Half of the Mission Outcomes outlined on page 10 focused on user experience but there are

currently no capabilities to achieve them. As a result, Digital LOG IT Architecture will establish

these capabilities as they are a prerequisite for program offices to use HCD.

Operating Model An operating model bridges strategy and day-to-day operations to guides the organization,

provide the context, and enable the behaviors that will realize the strategy and vision. Operating

models exist along a continuum based on a combination of a command’s context and

complexity. While an operating model is not the strategy itself, it does help refine and reinforce

the strategy. Similarly, while the model does not provide operational instructions, it does help



guide them. Defining an operating model for the LOG FAM does not seek to create something

that will be static, but rather seeks to think critically through the structure, interactions, and

needs of the various components of the organization. It is an iterative process and should be

continually improved. Figure 6 illustrates the progression from the current state operating model

to the North Star future state.

Figure 6. Progression to Shared Services

To progress to shared capabilities, Navy Logistics is moving through a series of transformational

steps to reach the North Star. Currently, silos across vectors and domains repeatedly provide

the same services. The Service Hierarchy, on page 10, represents an in-between future state

where some services are shared. In this model, services most common across the organization

can be provided by select groups. As additional services shift into the shared category,

functional domains begin to break down. Finally, when LOG IT reaches the North Star, it can

implement a shared services model which groups common service offerings and provides them

to end users based on mission needs. This will define a standard approach for delivering better

value.

Current State In the current state, functional domains within Navy Logistics operate in silos. Little coordination

and communication has resulted in redundancies and wasted resources. Organizational areas

and program offices invest in technologies to provide services already provided in other

domains, leading to everyone doing everything. There is little to no focus on or understanding of

user experience which in turn degrades user adoption and effectiveness. If this continues,

money will continue to be spent on duplicative efforts and mission readiness will ultimately be

degraded.

Future State Navy Logistics is increasing its focus on shared services as it moves towards a future state

operating model by adopting service management principles and committing to a digital

transformation. As depicted in Figure 7, the immediate future state operating model is built

around the services provided by Navy Logistics



Figure 7. Navy Logistics Operating Model

While services are at the core of the future state operating model, they are influenced by

external areas contributing to the successful implementation and operation of the model.

Strategy, based on Federal and Navy imperatives, builds the foundation and is the driving force

behind all decisions made. Governance dictates the roles and responsibilities critical to

implementation. Various methods will be introduced to employ leading processes and

procedures. Finally, personas will ensure a user-centric design and ensure all services being

provided are ultimately needed by the end user.

The Navy LOG IT operating model is

based on the interactions and strategic

integration points between various

vectors, systems, and functional areas. A

vector is an innovative IT investment that

strategically aligns LOG FAM funding to

accelerate digital future capabilities for

achieving mission outcomes. Functional

areas are the loose groupings of functional

capabilities around supply, maintenance,

and facilities. In the current state, there is

little integration as each silo is providing

many of the same services creating

redundancies and wasted resources. Error! Figure 8. Level 1 Vector to Services Mapping



Reference source not found. maps the level 1 service to vectors, showing this interaction at

the highest level and illustrates how who the vectors fit into the functional domain areas.

The Level 2 service to vector mapping intends to illustrate, in greater detail, the interaction and

overlap between the vectors. Areas marked with a “P” indicate that the vector provides that

service to its end users in uncoordinated efforts today. Figure 8 shows that multiple vectors

provide multiple services.

Figure 8. Level 2 Service to Vector Mapping, 2018 Version 1.0

The lack of coordination wastes resources via duplicative capabilities and creates a

nonstandard user experience, making information sharing and collaboration difficult. By

understanding these interactions, Navy logistics can move towards a model with more

centralization and better coverage of services. To improve logistics efficiencies, improve the

return on investment, and ultimately deliver mission needs at speed, the following questions

must be answered:

• What services are duplicated and need to be prioritized for centralization?

o e.g. Merge or formalize collaboration for programs around maintenance (NAMS,

NOME, NMMES etc.)

• What are the service gaps, areas not covered by the vectors but should be?

o e.g. Coordinated PLM services across programs like design integration and

manufacturing management.

• What are the service intersections and interdependencies, where program integration is

critical?

o e.g. Procurement involves integration of CBM+ that triggers maintenance needs,

stock check by NOSS and initiating replenishment ashore. Initial integration view

is under development and will be provided to LOG IT to use for formalizing

integration, planning prototypes or conducting BPR initiatives.



North Star

The North Star logistics readiness model is based on shared capabilities where service

fulfillment is not linear or disconnected but a network of interconnected shared services. Only

the services that are needed to accomplish the mission will be prioritized. In this model, services

drive the organization to minimize redundancy. Shared services should have the following three

characteristics:

1. Common capability

a. Multiple organizations with similar functional needs

b. Unique needs addressed through business rules

2. Centralized responsibility

a. One / few parties accountable – Service Owners

b. Service and IT governance alignment

3. Available to all

a. Available for users across the enterprise

b. User / service segmentation addresses relevance

Figure 9: North Star Logistics Readiness Model



Error! Reference source not found. demonstrates a conceptual shared services operating

model that is based around the three characteristics listed. Organizational domains can be built

around capabilities by designing an IT architecture based on services which will minimize

duplication. By continually evaluating and improving the service design, the LOG FAM will

ensure that mission and user needs drive IT architecture upgrades and investments to

ultimately improve readiness.

Implementation Guidance Operating Model

For a Navy Logistics operating

model, strategy must always be the

driving force. In this case, having a

clear understanding of the mission

and how the mission relates to the

desired outcomes are the

fundamental elements of strategy.

By using the DoD and DON

imperatives referenced throughout

this Plan, Navy LOG IT can ensure

the services enabled by IT meet

mission objectives. Identifying the

Mission Outcomes that each service

will meet will help focus the IT

development on critical components

and reduce waste.

Governance defines the decision-making and delegation of authority and creates the framework

that balances stakeholder interests and risk mitigation. The LOG IT EXCOMM is the

fundamental governance body that ultimately approves a service-based operating model. The

service related digital roles will be focused on the implementation and operation of the strategy.

This includes the service-to-IT alignment that defines the key relationships between the mission

and the technology supporting it.

The methods used to implement the operating model will be important to maximizing the value

captured. HCD as a methodology will be critical to ensure the user experience related mission

outcomes are addressed and met throughout the transformation. Similarly, user experience

capabilities, such as user insight and user experience design, will ensure the needs and the

effectiveness of the warfighter are the ultimate goal.

Finally, culture and values define the key attributes and behaviors the organization strives for

and establishes how work will get done. The change management aspect of the Digital

Transformation will ultimately drive success of the implementation.

Error! Reference source not found. demonstrates a potential checklist to establish a new

service or update an existing one. Broken down by main areas of the operating model, these

items would need to be accomplished before a service-based model could be implemented. The

items in the strategy area are focused on the mission and underlying cause for the change while

the governance and methods areas have items more focused on the operation and

Figure 10. Navy Logistics Operating Model



implementation. The items in the Change Management section focus on culture and

communications. The roles listed in the owner column are taken from the Workforce

Architecture, explained on page 21 and detailed in the Workforce Architecture Plan. While this

checklist is not exhaustive, it does capture the high-level priorities and highlights critical steps in

ensuring a system or application is designed based around a service using Human Centered

Design principles.

Figure 11. Checklist for Creating Services

Area Item Owner

Strategy Determine Mission Outcomes that the service will meet

Identify operational readiness and user experience metrics

Define future service capabilities needed to meet mission and user needs

Build out scenarios to identify service integration points

Chief Experience Officer, Executive Service Owner

Governance Establish governance model to drive service management in collaboration with overall portfolio governance.

Manage performance lifecycle for services including collecting metrics, identifying reporting needs, analyzing metrics, triggering changes.

Prioritize investments based on service needs.

Refine roles & responsibilities to manage governance needs.

Executive Service Owner, Service Owner

Methods Incorporate HCD to align service and user goals

Integrate with program offices to translate mission needs into IT objectives and plans.

Monitor and manage service performance initiatives

Service Design Lead, User Experience Designer

Change Management

Determine roles needed to manage logistics services

Develop communication plan and distribute policies

Manage trainings to ensure service changes are adopted

User Community Director



Workforce Architecture – Digital Roles To reshape the workforce for a digital

transformation, a set of roles have been

developed that will enable the implementation.

These do not need to be completely new roles

as many of the responsibilities detailed in

each are found across the organization today.

Rather, these can be combined and adapted

from existing roles and can evolve over time

to meet the service needs. Emphasis on

organizational change will be critical to

change management and ultimate adoption.

The roles listed in the table below are related to the Service Plan and will be critical to the

success of the Digital LOG IT Transformation.

Figure 13. Services Role Descriptions

Horizon Title Echelon Description

1 User Community

Director II

Community managers develop, extend and maintain groups of users and

stakeholders gathered around common interests/roles via community platforms

1 Exec Service

Owner II

The Executive Service Owner is responsible for providing guidance and

managing the Service Owners under their charge. While the Service Owner is

assigned a specific service to manage, the Executive Service Owner must

oversee the strategy and operations of a group of services.

1 Service Owner III+

The Service Owner is accountable for a specific service within the organization

regardless of where the technology components or professional capabilities

reside and is responsible for continuous improvement and the management of

change affecting the end-to-end service under their charge.

1 Service Design

Lead III+

Service design thinkers are in charge of planning and organizing a service

(including its infrastructure, communication and material components) to

improve its quality and the interaction between service provider and customers.

Their purpose is to make sure the services are designed according to the

needs of customers or participants, that they are user-friendly and relevant to

the end user

1 User Experience

Designer III+

User-experience designers are responsible for creating the look and feel of a

specific computer interface. This allows them to navigate the functionality of

that interface and produce a certain type of human-computer interaction.

These designers generally work on teams, applying their skills to a website or

computer product, such as a piece of software.

2 Chief Experience

Officer (CXO) I

The CXO is responsible for establishing and supervising the implementation of

an overarching service strategy. The CXO is also responsible for ensuring a

consistent user experience across platforms and improving it through Software

/ hardware design management, creative reviews, and concept development

For more details, reference the Digital Transformation Workforce Plan.

Figure 12. Workforce Architecture



Internal Links in The Digital Transformation Plan A key aspect of the Services Plan is how it integrates with the other components of the overall

Digital Transformation Plan. This section identifies how the Service Strategy is linked to the

Technology and Data plan and how it will drive the underlying IT architecture.

Enterprise Technical Reference Framework (ETRF) The ETRF provides a framework and

roadmap to transform 1600+ current

Applications and 5000+ data sources to a

common unified logistics IT platform. One of

the foundational steps to operationalize this

technology plan is the Microservices Based

Architecture Area which relies on several key

concepts related to the Service Plan: the

Service Hierarchy, Human Centered Design,

and a defined operating model. Human

Centered Design and Service Strategy help

identify the key capabilities and experiences

that Digital LOG IT needs to provide to its end

user. Service Design and Microservices

Based Architecture methodologies will

capture these needs and transform them into Application Programming Interfaces (APIs). This is

the critical connection between the Service Plan and the ETRF. The service hierarchy will drive

the creation of service specific APIs at the appropriate level. This will enable Navy Logistics to

describe the IT architecture in terms of a handful of intuitive APIs that can be integrated with

existing capabilities, combined with cross domain Apps and APIs to provide new capabilities,

and finally combined with analytics to provide innovation and next generation mission readiness

capabilities.

Figure 15. Enterprise Technical Reference Framework (ETRF)

Figure 14. Service Plan and ETRF Intersection



Data Plan The LOG IT Digital Transformation Data Plan presents a holistic, enterprise approach to

building a data-driven environment for the Navy to move data at the speed of the mission. The

Data Plan outlines the efforts to eliminate data silos and streamline capabilities to glean useful

insight from data; allowing better informed readiness and logistics decisions to drive to the ideal

“Digital Navy.” The goal of the Data Plan is that data will be:

1. Auditable – the enterprise will document logistics transactions through several lenses

including from research and development to disposal, from ashore to afloat, and from

requirement to expenditure.

2. Visible – leveraging human centered design will ensure that users get the data and

more importantly the knowledge from the data they need when they need it.

3. Trustworthy – users will understand the pedigree of the data and have confidence in

the data to consider it as authoritative in making high fidelity readiness decisions.

4. Accessible – metadata will support user-generated and automated discovery, reporting

and analytics across the enterprise and to external stakeholders.

By achieving these characteristics, data will enable the Mission Outcomes, which are the

ultimate driver of mission accomplishment. In addition to enabling the Mission Outcomes, the

Data Plan provides guidance on understanding the type of data needed to provide the services

in the Service Hierarchy. With this, Navy Logistics will be able to build out scenarios that detail

the interaction between data and services. The figure below is an example of a procurement to

order fulfilment scenario that is a small portion of a larger, detached operations scenario.

Figure 16. Logistics Scenario with Data Integration



Appendix References

Figure 17. Service Plan References

Title Source

1 Logistics Competency Book DoD

2 DoD Enterprise Service Management Framework DoD

3 Business Process Reengineering Artifacts DoD

4 United States Navy Maintenance Pamphlet DoD

5 Process Cycle Memorandums DoD

6 DON Goals, Objective, Outcomes DoD

7 IPS Element Guidebook DoD

8 NOSS OTA Informational Packet DoD

9 DTT NOBLE Overview Brief DoD

10 NAMS Problem Statement DoD

11 Maritime Maintenance IT Roadmap DoD

12 CNO: A Design for Maintaining Maritime Superiority DoD

13 NAVFAC CNO Brief DoD

14 NAE Sustainment Vision 2020 DoD

15 NAVSUP: High Level Industrial Touchpoints – Supply Perspective DoD

16 TOA PGI Brief DoD

17 Ashore Logistics IT Cybersecurity – IPR DoD

18 Business Enterprise Architecture 11.1 DoD

19 TOA/PGI Status 20180409 DoD

20 NDMS MRO DoD

21 Operational Availability Handbook DoD

22 National Defense Strategy DoD

23 PLM OPNAV Roadmap Deck DoD

24 Best Practices Insights: ITIL Service Strategy BMC

25 Discover the potential of IT Service Management Deloitte

26 Operating Models EY

27 Connect Business Moments, Personas and Journey Maps to Boost Customer Experience Outcomes

Gartner

28 2018 Strategic Roadmap for IT Service Management Gartner

29 Critical Capabilities for IT Service Management Tools Gartner

30 Driving Digital Business Transformation for Industry Leadership: An Executive Perspective

Gartner

31 Service Strategy ITIL



Federal and Navy Imperatives DoD Enterprise Service Management Framework, Edition III (DESMF) DoD Instruction 8440.01, Information Technology Service Management, directs DoD

components to ensure their ITSM activities are consistent with the DESMF

The goal of the DESMF is to provide a framework to successfully align the delivery of IT services with the mission of the Department. Successful ITSM integrates the contributions of people, processes, and technology that result in a combined effort to promote new ideas, effectiveness, and efficiencies by standard methods and practices that deliver value to mission partners. The DESMF provides the groundwork for the Service Plan and outlines the DoD approach for employing a service-based IT architecture.

Figure 18. Notional Service Management System from DESMF

Service quality management is based on a four-phase approach that enables consistent visibility into the missions/business perspective of IT performance, with the mechanisms in place to inform service management and support future IT investment decisions. This approach is an adaptation of the Deming cycle to specifically address IT service quality, customized by the Navy ITSMO. The four phases are:

• Plan: The quality approach

• Do: Establish and execute the quality approach

• Check: Monitor and report quality management

• Act: Correct and continuously improve quality management



Figure 19. Service Quality Management

CNO Guidance In addition to Department of the Navy and Department of Defense instructions, specific

guidance from the CNO has been incorporated into this plan to ensure the end result is in line

with his overall intent. In the “Design for Maintaining Maritime Superiority” the CNO states the

desired outcome as “a Naval Force that produces leaders and teams who learn and adapt to

achieve maximum possible performance, and who achieve and maintain high standards to be

ready for decisive operations and combat.” This is achieved through four major lines of effort.

1. Strengthen Naval Power at and from Sea: Maintain a fleet that is trained and ready to

operate and fight decisively – from the deep ocean to the littorals, from the sea floor to

space, and in the information domain. Align our organization to best support generating

operational excellence.

2. Achieve High Velocity Learning at Every Level: Apply the best concepts, techniques and

technologies to accelerate learning as individuals, teams and organizations. Clearly

know the objective and the theoretical limits of performance – set aspirational goals.

Begin problem definition by studying history – do not relearn old lessons. Start by

seeing what you can accomplish without additional resources. During execution,

conduct routine and rigorous self-assessment. Adapt processes to be inherently

receptive to innovation and creativity.

3. Strengthen Our Navy Team for the Future: We are one Navy Team – comprised of a

diverse mix of active duty and reserve Sailors, Navy Civilians, and our families – with a

history of service, sacrifice and success. We will build on this history to create a climate

of operational excellence that will keep us ready to prevail in all future challenges.

4. Expand and Strengthen Our Network of Partners: Deepen operational relationships with

other services, agencies, industry, allies and partners – who operate with the Navy to

support our shared interests.

These lines of effort have been the foundation and driving force behind the mission outcomes,

roadmap for the future, and many other aspects of the plan.



Business Enterprise Architecture 11.1 The BEA provided great insight and was a major source of input to the Service Hierarchy.

However, the BEA was not sufficient as the Service Hierarchy is meant to progress us towards

a shared services model. In addition to providing a robust taxonomy, the BEA has a detailed

Business Capability Acquisition Cycle which closely relates to a service development / delivery

cycle.

Figure 20. Business Capability Acquisition Cycle

DON Goals and Objectives

The Department of the Navy Goals and Objectives were developed using the National Defense

Strategy and serve as a guide for all initiatives. These goals and objectives were a driving force

behind the mission outcomes and continue to provide insight into the underlying mission needs

for the digital transformation.

SECNAV Priorities

NDS Aligned Strategic Objectives Outcomes

PEOPLE

• Implement initiatives to recruit and retain the best team to bolster capabilities and readiness, and build a culture that “respects and protects” our people (NDS Objective 1.5)

1. "Employer of Choice" - Higher accession rates/fewer vacancies /higher standards for uniform and civilian personnel

2. Barriers to recruiting, retaining and developing a diverse highly talented workforce reduced

3. Modernized naval education culture adopted/learning culture developed 4. Safe operations established and consistently reinforced 5. Incidents of sexual assault, harassment and discrimination reduced



PROCESSES

• Improve and strengthen business operation through a move to DON enterprise solutions; reduce administrative and regulatory burden; align with DoD shared services where practical and effective (NDS Objective 3.1)

• Optimize DON organizational structures (NDS Objective 3.2)

• Undergo audit and improve the quality of budgetary and financial information that is most valuable in managing the DON (NDS Objective 3.3)

1. Use of data analytics and artificial intelligence in DON-wide decision making increased

2. Acquisition agility/speed/responsiveness and ability to develop and transition technology to the fleet at the speed of relevance enhanced

3. Improved accountability for contractor performance/ fewer instances of "accepted product with exceptions“

4. Rationalized business system environment 5. Full budget authority executed in accordance with laws, regulations and

ethical standards that “play in the midfield” 6. Annual audit and remediation is institutionalized, with a path to clean

opinion in the near term established 7. Improved financial data veracity, visibility, and analytic capability for

continuous portfolio management 8. Redundancies across the enterprise to include OPNAV, HQMC and

Secretariat reduced to produce $ savings and improved agility 9. C2 optimized

CAPABILITIES

• Ensure the Navy and Marine Corps are ready to fight today (NDS Objective 1.1)

• Lay the foundation of future readiness through recapitalization, innovation and modernization (NDS Objective 1.2)

• Enhance IT & cybersecurity capabilities (NDS Objective 1.3)

• Ensure the best intelligence, counterintelligence and security support for DON operations (NDS Objective 1.4)

• Reform the Security Cooperation Enterprise (NDS Objective 2.1)

• Deepen interoperability with NDS allies and partners (NDS Objective 2.2)

1. Aviation and ship availability and personnel deployability fully restored to meet missions

2. Inventory of weapons and ammunition to meet warfighting requirements restored

3. Integration of unmanned systems significantly increased 4. DON investments in Intelligence enterprise/counter intelligence aligned to

support NDS 5. Path to 326/355 ship Navy established and on schedule 6. Sustainable sea-leg of the nuclear triad maintained 7. Shipyards and infrastructure modernized on a sustainable path to

modernization 8. IT system complexity reduced/interoperability enhanced 9. Cyber capability to respond and prevent intrusions/attacks increased 10. Continuous evaluation and "Insider Threat Hubs" established 11. Protection of intellectual property improved 12. More strategic, harmonized approach to maritime security cooperation

implemented 13. Improved cadre of security cooperation personnel and other DON

support elements at US Embassies 14. Allies and partners with capability, capacity and awareness to

independently or collaboratively respond to shared threats and challenges

15. DON maritime objectives advanced by Interagency Policy 16. Allies and partners provided forward presence, habitual relationships,

and technology cooperation efforts via our R&D enterprise.

National Defense Strategy To fully understand the mission needs, it is important to start at the top where all goals and

objectives ultimately come from. The 2018 National Defense Strategy was released in January

of 2018 and outlines SecDef’s strategic approach to meeting the DoD’s objectives.

Strategic Approach

1. Build a More Lethal Force

2. Strengthen Alliances and Attract New Partners

3. Reform the Department for Greater Performance and Affordability

a. Deliver performance at the speed of relevance

b. Organize for innovation

c. Drive budget discipline and affordability to achieve solvency

d. Streamline rapid, iterative approaches from development to fielding

e. Harness and protect the National Security Innovation Base



Industry Best Practices KPIs / Metrics KPIs are selected metrics used to measure the achievement of critical success factors (CSFs).

There may be many metrics, but only the most important metrics are defined as key

performance indicators and used to actively manage and report on the process or IT service.

KPIs should be selected to ensure that efficiency and cost effectiveness are managed. The

following is a list of logistics digital focus areas and potential KPI’s for each one.

Establish flexible and proactive digital end-to-end supply chain

• % Items with demand forecast based on analytics

• % of fleet tracked in real time

• % warehouses ‘automated’ / ’digitalized’

Develop digital capability for manufacturing excellence

• % of machines with full data capturing

• % factories with manufacturing control tower operational

• % workers with smart devices

• % roles or work processes automated (robotics)

Use digital solutions to drive sustainable sourcing value creation

• % of targeted data sources included in Supply Analytics

• % e-Invoicing

• % suppliers registering in Supplier Portal vs. target

• % categories included in Cat Mgmt. Portal

• % events through e-sourcing

Increase process automation through RPA & AI

• Number of FTEs automated

• % of ‘processes’ automated

Enhance analytics capabilities within operational processes

• % of selected KPIs automated/generated through analytics

• Number of different sources (internal and external) used to collect data for analytics

Develop workforce through digital solutions

• % of E2E processes standardized

• % of eLearning vs traditional learning

• % users that use mobile solutions to handle information

• % of users contributing to internal platforms

Digital Logistics Capabilities As Navy Logistics continues down the path of a digital transformation, there are capabilities that

it will develop that exist along a spectrum.



Figure 21. Digital Logistics Capabilities

Industry Logistics Digital Guiding Principles Guiding principles to incorporate digital capabilities into a shared services logistics operating

model.

1. Consumer-driven Supply Chains that are Rapid and Responsive

• Design the supply chain operating model to start with the end-consumer demand

(consumer sales data, social data, etc.) aligned with supply realities.

2. An Integrated Supply Chain Operating Model that Breaks The Silos and Provides

Connectivity

• Enabling visibility and planning & execution capability across the end-to-end

supply chain. Business processes that span across functional silos. Cross

functional Network Planner with end-to-end visibility and overall responsibility for

supply chain performance.

3. Performance Management that is Aligned Across The Organization

• Automated predictive analytics & scenario modelling to drive operational decision

making. Business & financial metrics to drive supply chain process.

4. Clear and Differentiated Supply Chain Segmentation Strategies

• Smaller and increased segments to satisfy diverse requirements while still

maintaining operational efficiency and flexibility.

5. End-to-end Collaboration Capacities Within The Organization and Across External

Trading & Service partners

• Collaborating within and outside the organization on social media platforms for

faster decision making.

6. Digital Capabilities & Technology Platform that is Scalable, Intelligent and Connected,

Providing End-to-end Visibility, Enabling Automated Concurrent Planning & Fulfillment

with Collaboration Across The Organization



• Digital platform that is Cloud enabled with cognitive capabilities and is extensible

for building plug and play applications. Enables collaboration on social media &

mobile framework. Provides real time connectivity to internet of things.

Customer Experience Capabilities The following table describes the specific practices that enable each customer experience

capability.

Figure 22. Customer Experience Capabilities

Customer Insight Customer Experience

Strategy

Customer Experience

Design

Customer Centric

Organization and

Governance

Customer Experience

Measurement

Customer Centric

Culture

• Feedback from

Customers

• Define CE Strategy • Create CE Journeys

by Channel

• Assign a Governing

Body

• Define a CE Quality

Framework

• Communicate

Importance of CE

• Input from Employees • Share the CE

Strategy

• Engage Partners and

Employees

• Develop and Maintain

Decision Framework

• Benchmark Across

Industries

• Collect and Share

Stories

• Observational

Research

• Include CE in Project

Funding Criteria

• Use Customer Insight

to Define Project

Requirements

• Use Consistent

Customer Identifier

• Collect Operational

Metrics

• Screen Candidates for

Customer-Centric

Values and Skills

• Maintain a Voice of

Customer Facility

• Branded CE for

Different Segments

• Identify Complex

Interdependencies

• CE Improvement

Projects

• Define Subsets of CE

Metrics

• Provide Training

• Obtain a Cross-

Channel Customer

View

• Utilize Models • Follow Defined CE

Impact Assessment

Process

• Monitor Progress • Analyze CE Gaps • Use Informal Rewards

and Celebrations

• Document and Share • Dedicate Leadership • Proactively Adjust

Designs

• Include CE as

Criterion for Business

Decisions

• Use Metrics in Learn-

Improve-Learn Cycle

• Connect Formal

Reward Structures to

CE Metrics

• Engage and

Encourage Customers

• Include CE Metrics in

Evaluating Employee

Performance

• Share Metrics • Enable Executives to

Work on the Front

Line

• Facilitate the

Necessary

Coordination

• Calculate and Monitor

the ROI

Artifact Background and Approach

Mission Outcomes

Approach

By incorporating the information and themes from the sources, we collected the fundamental

objectives of Navy Logistics. To ensure the mission is driving IT, the outcomes contain the

following characteristics:

1. Visible: All programs contribute to enable these and understand how.

2. Comprehensive: All transformation pillars play a role: Service, Data, Tech, Security,

Change

3. Systemic: Integrate within LOG IT governance and lifecycle processes

4. Anchor: Guide functional and technical artifacts



Service Hierarchy

Background / Context

The Service Hierarchy is meant to capture all the services that Navy Logistics provides to its

end users. These are all the things that are done to help accomplish the mission. The purpose

of capturing all the Navy Logistics services in one graphic is to determine left and right lateral

limits for the implementation of an IT architecture and help determine future governance

models. It is purposefully kept at a high level to ensure a strategic mindset at the organizational

level.

Approach

The Service Hierarchy has been through many iterations and has evolved through feedback

from vector and functional area leadership. It was initially focused around three main areas:

Supply Chain Management (SCM), Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO), Product

Lifecycle Management (PLM), and Shore / Facilities. The BPRs and BEA provided a

comprehensive list of services that are currently provided which we used to group into Level 1,

2, and 3 services. By incorporating industry service models, we aim to ensure the list of services

will be comprehensive of emerging technologies and future user needs.



Figure 23. Services Descriptions

Service Description

Planning

The ability to define an integrated plan for addressing maintenance, supply and other operational needs for end users. Includes services around demand forecasting and optimization, demand planning, replenishment planning, material planning, supply planning, user and supplier collaboration.

Design Integration

The ability to collaboratively create, manage, disseminate, and use product data. Includes product requirements management, product design, BOM management, product catalog management. Also includes services to ensure product reliability and quality management and associated supplier collaboration.

Program Management

The ability to manage activities including logistics program governance, audit readiness, financial management, initiation, tracking, modifications, risk management etc.

Data Management

The ability to collect, analyze, report and maintain data (e.g. readiness reporting, inventory data, order, and procurement data etc.) to support decision making and execute supply and maintenance activities. Also includes services to facilitate not just flow of raw data, but flow of relevant and accurate knowledge to the users.

Job Support The ability to identify, create, manage and disseminate digital content to users of logistics services for improving job efficiency and knowledge collaboration.

Procurement The ability to identify, request, source, access, and manage materials to support readiness needs. Includes purchase order management, strategic souring and associated internal and external supplier collaboration.

Order Fulfilment

The ability to manage the quantity and value of material to meet supply and maintenance needs. Includes replenishment, receipt and acceptance of materials and warehouse management to support order and accountability services.

Transportation

Services covering selection and management of all transportation providers and channels. Includes activities for outbound and inbound shipping including dispatch, tracking, network optimization, distribution, arrival and collection.

Manufacturing Management

Services that comprise the technologies, methods and collaboration needed for additive and traditional manufacturing of parts as well as controlling the quality of those items.

Maintenance Identification

Services for diagnosing equipment failure and prescribing necessary maintenance as well as the management of associated work orders.

Maintenance Scheduling

Services for providing an integrated schedule across different maintenance levels that can be dynamically updated based on planned and unplanned activities. Includes services that allow prioritization based on criticality, material availability etc.

Maintenance Execution

Services for preparing and executing preventative and restorative maintenance tasks on schedule. Includes triggering parts request, recording and tracking in-progress tasks, collaborating with the maintenance community to complete execution.

Maintenance Completion

Services for recording maintenance completion, conducting inspections and reporting completion to relevant stakeholders.

Operations Support Services that are critical to operational readiness at the tactical level (e.g. ammo management, food management, postal services, Navy cash, etc.)

Facilities Support Services that maintain shore readiness to support supply and maintenance operations (e.g. HAZMAT, utilities, vehicles, environmental, safety etc.)

Installations Support Services for sustaining and operating Navy installations such as restoration, modernization, ATFP, housing etc.



This table captures of the services within the hierarchy and is used for ongoing coordination.

Figure 24. Full List of Captured Services

0 Shared Services 2 Maintenance, Repair, & Overhaul

0.1 Planning 2.1 Maintenance Identification

0.1.1 Demand Forecasting 2.1.1 Diagnosis & Validation

0.1.2 Supply Planning 2.1.2 Work Order Management

0.1.3 Maintenance Planning 2.2 Maintenance Scheduling

0.1.4 Shore Planning 2.2.1 Maintenance Forecasting

0.2 Design Integration 2.2.2 Schedule Deconfliction

0.2.1 Design Tool Integration 2.3 Maintenance Execution

0.2.2 Engineering Change Management 2.3.1 Preventative Maintenance

0.2.3 Design Interface 2.3.2 Corrective Maintenance

0.2.4 Product Reliability Management 2.3.3 Alterative Maintenance

0.2.5 BOM Management 2.4.1 Maintenance Completion

0.3 Program Management 2.4.2 Maintenance Record Update

0.3.1 Service Level Performance Mgmt 2.4.3 Maintenance Closeout

0.3.2 Financial Management

0.3.3 Business Process Orchestration 3 Support

0.3.4 Audit Readiness Management 3.1 Operations Support

0.4 Data Management 3.1.1 Ammo Management

0.4.1 Data Analysis & Reporting 3.1.2 Quality of Life Support

0.4.2 Data Alignment 3.2 Facilities Support

0.4.3 Data Governance 3.2.1 Vehicle Management

0.4.4 Category Management 3.2.2 Utilities Management

0.4.5 Data Maintenance 3.2.3 Hazardous Material Management

0.5 Job Support 3.2.4 Environmental Management

0.5.1 Knowledge Management 3.2.5 Safety Program Management

0.5.2 Digital Assistance 3.3 Installations Support

0.5.3 Collaboration Management 3.3.1 ATFP

0.5.4 Workforce Management 3.3.2 Housing

3.3.3 SRM

1 Supply Chain Management

1.1 Procurement 4 Enablers

1.1.1 Purchase Request Management 4.1 Policy Compliance

1.1.2 Purchase Order Management 4.2 Sustaining Engineering

1.1.3 Strategic Sourcing 4.3 Support Equipment

1.2 Order Fulfilment 4.4 Manpower and Personnel

1.2.1 Replenishment 4.5 Procurement Support

1.2.2 Receipt, Acceptance, Issuance 4.6 Network Design and Management

1.2.3 Warehouse Optimization 4.7 Training

1.2.4 Property / Inventory Management 4.8 Computer Resources

1.3 Transportation

1.3.1 Outbound Shipping

1.3.2 Inbound Shipping

1.3.3 In-Transit Visibility

1.4 Manufacturing Management

1.4.1 Additive Manufacturing

1.4.2 Traditional Manufacturing

1.4.3 Product Quality Management

DRAFT

ENTERPRISE TECHNICAL REFERENCE FRAMEWORK

ETRF WHITE PAPER

CONTENTS

CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................................................... 0

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 1

VISION AND OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................. 1

ARCHITECTURE GUIDING PRINCIPLES ......................................................................................................... 1

ENTERPRISE TECHNICAL REFERENCE FRAMEWORK - ETRF ............................................................................ 2

USER INTERFACE ......................................................................................................................................... 3

INTEGRATED PLATFORM-AS-A-SERVICE ..................................................................................................... 4

DATA-AS-A-SERVICE .................................................................................................................................... 5

SECURED CLOUD AND DETACHED INFRASTRUCTURE ................................................................................ 6

PLATFORM FOR INNOVATION ........................................................................................................................ 7

GLOSSARY ....................................................................................................................................................... 8

APPENDIX ......................................................................................................................................................10

ARCHITECTURE GUIDING PRINCIPLES (DETAILED) ....................................................................................10

TECHNOLOGY STRATEGY DRIVERS ............................................................................................................10

SCALABLE PLATFORM-AS-A-SERVICE (PAAS) ............................................................................................11

HYBRID API INTEGRATION ....................................................................................................................11

CONTAINERIZED ORCHESTRATION .......................................................................................................11

MICROSERVICES VALUE PROPOSITION .....................................................................................................11

REACTIVE MICROSERVICES .......................................................................................................................12

SERVERLESS COMPUTE .............................................................................................................................12

CLOUD ADOPTION STRATEGY ...................................................................................................................13

DRAFT ETRF Whitepaper

1

INTRODUCTION

VISION AND OBJECTIVES

The vision of Enterprise Technical Reference Framework (ETRF) is to enable and accelerate the overall

objective of Navy Logistics IT. ETRF provides a digital logistics IT architecture that will generate scalable,

interoperable, flexible and fluid technology solutions; maximizing access to information/data via

applications anywhere, on any device at any time.

The main objectives of ETRF can be articulated along four major themes:

1. DIGITAL AGENDA - Enable a digital enterprise and a digital workforce by adopting scalable and

mobile Applications

2. SIMPLIFICATION - Create immersive customer experience by embracing human centred design,

mobility and IoT

3. NEW WAY TO OPERATE - Drive cloud migration to build common enterprise infrastructure - shared

cost and increased savings – Ashore & Afloat

4. INCREASE CYBER SECURITY - Automated governance and compliance to adhere to RMF and to

enable proactive defense

ARCHITECTURE GUIDING PRINCIPLES

The ETRF guiding principles defines the foundations of the new technology platform that will fulfil the vision and objectives of the Digital Logistics IT.

1. DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION - Replace logistics legacy systems and consolidate into the optimal

number of IT systems possible with a common access point based on human centred design.

2. SHARED SERVICES MODEL - Adopt a functional domain driven design and microservices architecture

approach to establish a shared services operating model and to position the platform to create

innovative cross-domain products and services.

3. CLOUD, ASHORE AND AFLOAT - Adopt a containerized cloud and edge posture and consistent

technology stack to seamlessly extend logistics IT capabilities across shipyards, ships and submarines

including detached operations.

4. SECURITY & AUDIT - Establish a robust framework for automated governance and compliance using

integrated DevSecOps which strictly adheres to RMF and enables proactive monitoring and defense.


2

ENTERPRISE TECHNICAL REFERENCE FRAMEWORK - ETRF

The Enterprise Technical Reference Framework will leverage the Digital Transform Plan – Services, Data,

Technology, Security and Change Management strategies – to provide a framework and roadmap to

transform 1600+ current Applications and 5000+ data sources to a common unified logistics IT platform.

The following graphic captures the key components of this unified platform.

The left side of the diagram shows how the Digital Transformation Plan will guide the nine identified

vectors to migrate the current applications and data sources to the common unified Logistics IT platform.

The focus of the graphics is on the Enterprise Technical Reference Framework which consists of three

major components:

1. USER INTERFACE - A personalized User Interface that provides a highly immersive customer

experience leveraging human centered design, business capabilities driven process orchestration and

edge computing that seamlessly integrates AR, VR, Robotics, Sensors, Analytics and Applications.

2. INTEGRATED PLATFORM AS A SERVICE - A highly scalable PaaS that unifies Logistics Apps and data in

a single platform exposing simple, intuitive domain driven APIs that not only enables rich logistics

capabilities but also opens the door for innovative integration with IoT (sensors, robotics), other Navy

/ DoD Systems and other Federal Govt. systems.

3. SECURED CLOUD AND DETACHED INFRASTRUCTURE - A highly secured and governed cloud and

detached infrastructure augmented with integrated DevOps, Containerization, Hybrid Integration

Platform and Data Integration to enable Ashore, Afloat and Detached scenarios.

A comprehensive security architecture will encompass the Enterprise Technical Reference Framework

automating governance and compliance activities to ensure strict adherence to Risk Management

Framework.


3

USER INTERFACE

The User Dashboard is a lightweight framework that supports the use of open source technologies to

create a responsive presentation layer that will conform to multiple form factors. The presentation layer

will leverage data binding technologies and open APIs to combine Applications and Analytics to provide a

immersive human centered user experience.

Industry leading Business Process Management products may be used to bring the services strategy to

life to cater to end to end user workflows and business processes.

Robotics Process Automation tools can be plugged into this framework to automate manual processes

that span across different Applications and Analytics and reduce time and increase efficiencies within

business processes and user workflows.

The API Gateway serves as the common way of interacting with all the applications and analytics and AI

offerings that will be part of the Ecosystem. Myriads of Internet of Things (IOT) including sensors can be

plugged into the framework using open APIs and data formats.

Non-Logistics Navy systems, other DOD and United States Federal Governments can interact with this

platform via open APIs that are exposed via the API Gateway.

Developer Portal will be used by the developer community - Navy Logistics IT and beyond – to explore

APIs and metadata to develop new and innovative products and services. IT Portal will be used to

maintain and operate the entire ecosystem including containerization and cloud provisioning.


4

INTEGRATED PLATFORM-AS-A-SERVICE

The user interface will be powered by an integrated Application and Data platform which will reside just

below the API Gateway. The top tier of this platform is represented by the core Logistics APIs that

captures the business capabilities that Logistics IT provides such as Supply, Ordering, Planning, etc. These

APIs are derived based on Services strategy and domain driven design.

The API Gateway will route requests to appropriate core Logistics APIs. These APIs are registered with the

API Gateway and the Gateway knows how to discover, load balance and route the appropriate requests

to them. It is important to note that the API Gateway will be used for incoming traffic from the User

Interface, IoT sensors, external systems (Non Navy Logistics), and IT and Developer Portal.

The core Logistics APIs will be provided by COTS (Custom Off the Shelf) products, legacy Applications’

APIs and refactored microservices based applications. The internal communication between these

microservices will happen over an event bus using publisher-subscriber (Pub-Sub) Architectural pattern.

Each service that exposes an API will be stateless and they will rely on the Event Hub to provide

asynchronous communication.

The inner microservices architecture will be based on the notion of bounded context and domain driven

model. The outer architecture will be based on containerization. The microservices along with their

dependencies and data requirements will be containerized and deployed together in a cloud agnostic

posture.

The bounded context and asynchronous comunication paradigm that the reactive microservices based

inner architecture provides in combination with containerization will enable the platform to be scalable

and deployable to the enterprise cloud and edges.

A single trunk of code along with sound API versioning strategy will enable the platform to remain flexible

to changes and ensure that the interfaces within Logistics and with external systems is easily maintained.

A Hybrid Integration Platform can be leveraged to integrate the disparate APIs from Applications, IOT

devices, COTS, EDIs and data sources to transform this tier into an integrated platform-as-a-service and

data-as-a-service.


5

DATA-AS-A-SERVICE

Data-as-a-service will integrate COTS data, Microservices App data into a Master Data Management

cluster and help facilitate data ingestion into the data lake. Further reference to the Data Integration and

Management will be articulated in the Data Strategy document.

The following architecture will be used to enable Analytics and AI:

Data Analytics guiding principles:

1. Build a decoupled system with clear separation of concern along data, storage, compute and

consumers

2. Employ the right tools and technologies at each tier based on functional use cases, data structures,

non-functional requirements such as latency, throughput and security and data access

requirements

3. Leverage cloud native and best-in-breed open source technologies and a server less posture with

the end goal of creating a highly scalable, resilient System with low maintenance overhead

4. Build a state-of-the-art Data lake that houses data ready for use to improve latency and real-time

compute requirements.

5. Achieve cost efficiency by choosing the right technologies and by closely monitoring cost as part

of the overall data governance.

6. Apply AI and Machine Learning to continually optimize the data pipeline and computational

algorithms of the System.


6

SECURED CLOUD AND DETACHED INFRASTRUCTURE

The integrated platform-as-a-service architecture will be hosted in a central cloud and distributed edge

posture. An integrated Dev-Sec-Ops and containerization will ensure that the IT capabilities are easily

coordinated, deployed and maintained between the central enterprise cloud and the cloud nodes on

board ships and submarines and also in Navy Shipyards.

A consistent technology stack across cloud and edges and the principles of communicating information

and syncing data only via APIs will ensure that the cloud and edges remain consistent and complement

each others capabilities. The same principles can be applied to Shipyards where consistent edges can be

leveraged for business continuity.

To enable detached capability four things are imperative:

1. A traditional hyperconverged infrastructure (HCI) solution bringing the agility and innovation of

public cloud to micro data centers on Submarines and Ships.

2. Ability to run big data analysis on Cloud native technologies which can be seamlessly synced with

enterprise cloud.

3. Implement serverless posture at the edge, minimizing memory and processing foot print on-board

submarines and ships.

4. Ability to prioritize data interchange between Enterprise Cloud and Edge


7

PLATFORM FOR INNOVATION

The Enterprise Technical Reference Framework is a framework that enables a common unified platform

while separating the operating concerns into four distinct tiers as indicated above. This separation of

concern will allow Navy Logistics IT to focus on delivering business value to their end users while

leveraging best-in-breed advancements in technology in UI, API, PaaS and DaaS.

Emerging technologies such as Blockchain can be easily integrated to this platform using open API

standards, Change Data Captures via DaaS and leveraging distributed computing across Enterprise Cloud

and distributed edges.

AI technologies today are laser focused on specific areas of innovation. We can easily integrate the

cutting edge AI tools and technologies in this platform to clean and standardize data, enrich user

experience through Natural Language Processing and Deep Learning while optimizing the Data Analytics

and generating actionable intelligence in real time.

The shared resource utilization model can be applied to both Applications and Analytics. The separation

of concerns of Big Data Analytics into storage, compute and presentation will allow stakeholders to bring

their own compute and AI tools to derive new insights while operating under the strict confines of data

governance and Security.

By integrating data and applications into a common unified platform, by representing Logistics IT with

intuitive APIs and by leveraging the best in breed cloud native and edge computing technologies the

Enterprise technical Reference Framework provides Navy Logistics a platform for innovation and

opportunities.


8

GLOSSARY

Terms Definitions

Edge Computing Edge computing reduces latency and enables immersive customer experience

by performing data processing at the edge of the network, near the source of

the data generated by IoT and sailor/end user interactions. This reduces the

communications bandwidth needed between distributed locations (afloat

scenario) and the central Cloud.

Integrated Dev Ops will enable deployment of edge computing resources and

event driven microservices will decide at runtime what to process at the edge

versus central cloud.

Serverless Compute Serverless compute uses events and functions to dynamically manage the

allocation of machine resources.

This minimizes the runtime footprint at both the Cloud and Edge where server

computing resources are only spun up as needed.

Hybrid Integration

Platform (HIP)

HIP integrates end user apps, COTS products, on-premise systems, IoT, B2B

applications and Data-as-a-service (DaaS) on Cloud and Edges. E.g. Informatica

and Mulesoft.

Dev Ops DevOps unifies software development (Dev) and software operation (Ops) for

Logistics applications. It is strongly reliant on automation and monitoring at all

steps of software construction, from integration, testing, releasing to

deployment and infrastructure management.

Domain Driven

Microservices

Expresses domain in simple named resource driven API posture. This

architectural style structures an application as a collection of loosely coupled

services. Services should be fine grained and the protocols should be

lightweight.

Reactive

Microservices

An event driven architecture where Microservices are stateless and

communicate with each other via an event hub. This allows the System to

scale automatically to handle concurrent processing under load.

PaaS A cloud computing service that provides a platform allowing Logistics

application developers to develop, run, and manage applications without the

complexity of building and maintaining the infrastructure typically associated

with developing and launching an app.

IaaS Refers to online services that provide high-level APIs used to de-reference

various low-level details of underlying network infrastructure like physical

computing resources, location, data partitioning, scaling, security, backup.

Data-as-a-Service On-demand Data for Sailors, Suppliers, Maintainers and other users to access

regardless of the geographic or organizational separation of provider and

consumer.


9

Terms Definitions

Metadata Store Metadata describes the structure and context of any data, of any subject,

stored in any format.

Data Lake To accomplish the Logistics Integrated Data Environment and to facilitate

innovative Analytics capability, a Data lake can be used to store all data in the

enterprise ranging from raw data (which implies exact copy of source system

data) to transformed data which is used for various tasks including reporting,

visualization, analytics and machine learning to make better supply chain

decisions.

Decoupled System A system that enables a IT Logistics programmer or agile team to make

changes to their Logistics IT system without influencing any other system.

Cloud Platform-as-a-

Service

Extends the basic Infrastructure-as-a-service model of Cloud to provide

platform capabilities via Databases, Application servers and DevOps

automation and other services to simplify building, running and maintaining

applications on the Cloud. E.g. Amazon RDS.


10

APPENDIX

ARCHITECTURE GUIDING PRINCIPLES (DETAILED)

TECHNOLOGY STRATEGY DRIVERS

A comprehensive approach along seven critical areas is essential to build and shape a successful

technology strategy


11

SCALABLE PLATFORM-AS-A-SERVICE (PAAS)

A highly scalable PaaS unifies Logistics Apps and data in a single platform exposing simple, intuitive

domain driven APIs that not only enables rich logistics capabilities but also opens the door for innovative

integration with IoT (sensors, robotics), other Navy / DoD Systems and Federal Govt. systems.

HYBRID API INTEGRATION

• Ability to integrate a wide range of APIs – Microservices, COTS, legacy App APIs, IOT and data APIs

• Enable Business Process via an integrated Platform as a Service

• Cloud agnostic

• Able to extend PaaS between Ashore and Afloat – Cloud, Fog and Edge

CONTAINERIZED ORCHESTRATION

• Package domain microservices, legacy Apps and COTS applications in containers for deployment –

ashore and afloat

• Scale resources dynamically based on workload

• Remain cloud agnostic

MICROSERVICES VALUE PROPOSITION


12

REACTIVE MICROSERVICES

Stateless Microservices should minimize synchronous invocations (for example, through REST) for intra-

microservices communications to ensure the best possible isolation and scalability. Consider using

asynchronous communication between the services via event hub in a pub-sub model.

SERVERLESS COMPUTE

Big data analytics should leverage serverless compute where possible. Much of the intelligent actions

based on streaming sensor data are also prime candidates for serverless posture.

Serverless compute is a multi-tenant event-driven compute platform that facilitates the development,

deployment, and execution of function-based microservices. Serverless computing is also known as

Function as a Service (FaaS/fPaaS).


13

CLOUD ADOPTION STRATEGY




Application Portfolio Plan Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Fleet Readiness & Logistics,


Manager (LOGFAM)

5/29/2018



Table of Contents

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ 3


Background ................................................................................................................................ 5

Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5

Core Functions of IT Portfolio Management ........................................................................... 7

Document Purpose ................................................................................................................. 9

Assessment ..............................................................................................................................10

As-Is State and Desired To-Be State ........................................................................................11

As-Is ......................................................................................................................................11

To-Be ....................................................................................................................................12

Application Portfolio Rationalization ..........................................................................................15

Approach ...............................................................................................................................15

Portfolio Management and Governance ................................................................................23

Conclusion: Next Steps .........................................................................................................25

Appendix A: Functional and Technical Health Assessment Examples ......................................26

Appendix B: Sample Governance Model ...................................................................................27

Appendix C: Sample Portfolio Management Mission, Vision, and Strategic Goals ....................28



List of Figures

FIGURE 1: FOUR CORE FUNCTION OF IT PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT POLICY .................................................................................. 8

FIGURE 2: FOUR CORE FUNCTIONS OF IT PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT STRATEGIC ACTIONS ............................................................... 8

FIGURE 3: LOGFAM MODERNIZATION VECTORS ................................................................................................................... 11

FIGURE 4: AMAZON CLOUD MIGRATION PROCESS .................................................................................................................. 12

FIGURE 5: MICROSOFT CLOUD MIGRATION PROCESS .............................................................................................................. 12

FIGURE 6. DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION VISION ........................................................................................................................ 13

FIGURE 7. PROPOSED APPLICATION RATIONALIZATION FACTORY................................................................................................ 14

FIGURE 8: APPLICATION RATIONALIZATION APPROACH ............................................................................................................ 15

FIGURE 9: EXAMPLE PROJECT TIMELINE AND ACTIONS ............................................................................................................. 16

FIGURE 10. EXAMPLE OF LIFE CYCLE ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................ 18

FIGURE 11. RATIONALIZATION LENSES .................................................................................................................................. 19

FIGURE 12. SAMPLE DISPOSITION MATRIX ............................................................................................................................ 20

FIGURE 13. SAMPLE DISPOSITION CRITERIA WITH CROSS-INDUSTRY STANDARDS .......................................................................... 20

FIGURE 14: PROPOSED SYSTEM LIFECYCLE PROCESS ................................................................................................................ 21

FIGURE 15: SAMPLE VECTOR ROADMAP ............................................................................................................................... 22

FIGURE 16: SAMPLE TRANSITION TIMELINE ........................................................................................................................... 23

FIGURE 17: PROPOSED GOVERNANCE MODEL ....................................................................................................................... 24



Executive Summary

In the past few years, there has been heightened conversation at all levels within the Federal

Government around IT Modernization. Policy and guidance has been provided by the White

House, Department of Defense (DoD), and the Navy regarding the steps to be taken and

actions that need to occur to ensure that Federal IT is able to improve mission readiness, not

hinder it. This guidance has been followed all the way down to the Logistics IT Executive

Committee (LOG IT EXCOMM) level, where it was realized that the current processes and

culture are inhibiting innovation and significantly delaying the delivery of Digital Transformation.

To this end, a Digital Transformation Team (DTT) was created to aggressively expand

transformation efforts across the Logistics Functional Area Manager (LOG FAM).

While the DTT has many areas that they are tackling, this document focuses on IT Portfolio

Management (IT PfM) and Application Portfolio Rationalization (APR) within the LOG FAM.

These functions are currently being performed in a limited capacity, within silos in Program

Offices, with no standard methodology or framework being followed. Due to the lack of

management, the IT Portfolio has grown very large and contains many systems performing

duplicative functions. In its current state, the portfolio does not support Digital Transformation

and needs standard processes and cultural change to do so.

In the future, all systems within the LOG FAM Portfolio will have their functionality transferred to

a shared services platform, enabled by cloud and digital, as outlined in the Digital

Transformation Technology Plan. For this transition to be effective, systems will be aligned to

and rationalized within one of the Modernization Vectors. Along with a change in the current

mindset around rationalization, there also needs to be an up to date and industry standard

process put in place to guide and govern portfolio rationalization. This process will take the form

of an “Application Rationalization Factory” and will standardize disparate processes being

performed across the LOG FAM.

Within the Application Rationalization Factory, the proposed rationalization approach will be

used to asses each application using industry standard techniques. Following the approach,

users will conduct a current state analysis, initial assessment using technical and functional

health assessments, and ultimate disposition of applications using a series of levers, lenses,

and factors. The approach is data driven, based on industry standards, and produces lifecycle

characterizations along with IT Roadmaps as outputs. Along with the adoption of the proposed

Application Rationalization approach, this document provides an overview of a proposed

governance model. As the portfolio rationalization process becomes defined, a standard

governance model will be imperative to continued improvement and success. Without a defined

governance model in place, the LOG FAM will not be able to adopt the proposed processes,

leading to continued delays in reaching Digital Transformation.



Background

Introduction

In May of 2017, the White House took multiple steps forward in the process of Modernizing

Federal IT. The first of which established the American Technology Council (ATC) to ensure the

secure and effective use of IT across the Federal Government1. The second of which was the

Executive Order on Strengthening the Cybersecurity of Federal Networks and Critical

Infrastructure2, that tasked the ATC with providing a report on the Modernization of Federal IT.

This report was completed later in 2017 with input from various Federal Agencies while also

including guidance from industry leading representatives3. It highlighted two focus areas for the

modernization effort that the Federal Government should focus on, Network Modernization and

Consolidation, and Share Services to Enable Future Network Architectures. The report also

stated that agencies should “realign their IT resources appropriately using business-focused,

data-driven analysis and technical evaluation” and “emphasize reprioritizing funds and should

consider ’cut and invest’ strategies that reallocate funding from obsolete legacy IT systems to

modern technologies, cloud solutions, and shared services, using agile development practices”3.

These actions by the White House speak to the needs for modernization within the Federal

Government to improve service delivery and focus resources on what customers of the

Government want and need most.

During 2016 and 2017, the DoD, through the National

Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)4, began the

acceleration and reformation of acquisition processes.

The intended outcome was to better equip the

warfighter with ‘the tool they need when they need it’.

These changes saw the Undersecretary of Defense

for Acquisition, Sustainment, and Technology (AT&L)

split into two smaller organizations, the

Undersecretary of Defense for Research and

Engineering (USDR&E) and the Undersecretary of

Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment (USDA&S)5.

Along with this split, the position of Chief Management

Officer (CMO) was elevated and tasked with improving the quality and productivity of business

operations, thereby reducing cost5. This monumental and culture shifting decision was in

response to the current acquisition program taking too long to provide warfighters the tools they

need and the mounting cost of old, outdated technology in need of modernization or

replacement.

1 Presidential Executive Order on the Establishment of the American Technology Council, May 2017 2 Presidential Executive Order on Strengthening the Cybersecurity of Federal Networks and Critical Infrastructure, May 2017 3 Report to the President on IT Modernization, 2017 4 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 5 Report to Congress Restructuring the Department of Defense Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Organization and Chief Management Office Organization, 2017

[The reorganization] reflects

the biggest change to the

Pentagon’s structure since

the landmark Goldwater

Nichols reforms.”

Ellen Lord

Under Secretary of Defense

for Acquisition and

Sustainment (A&S)



To support this significant organizational and cultural shift, the Under Secretary of the Navy has

responded by restructuring the Deputy Under Secretary of the Navy for Management (DUSNM)

replacing it with the Office of the DON Chief Management Officer (OCMO). The OCMO is

tasked with acting as “the catalyst to help rapidly prioritize and accelerate business

transformation initiatives”6. The office will focus on auditability and financial accountability,

system rationalization and modernization, data strategy, and business reform across the Navy

and DoD enterprise6. These changes and strategic direction closely follow the guidance from

the White House and DoD to change the current business operations culture to allow for “faster

access to accurate information, reducing overhead and bureaucracy, and streamlining

processes that impede rapid decision making”6.

Similarly, the forward-thinking members of LOG IT EXCOMM recognized the need for the

Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (DCNO) for Fleet Readiness and Logistics to pursue ‘Digital

Transformation’. Several factors contributed to this strategic shift including a mandate by the

Chief of Naval Operations (CNO). The LOG IT EXCOMM recognized that current LOG IT

portfolio funding decisions had been made via Program Objective Memorandum (POM)

activities in years prior. This meant that most, if not all, funding had been allocated for LOG

FAM programs, primarily for sustainment activities. Finding resources to pursue innovation for

systems and applications with existing governance, processes, technology, and people would

be a long, drawn out task. They realized that the current Portfolio Management of LOG IT

systems left them at a severe disadvantage with a significantly delayed timeline or even inability

to modernize in accordance with the CNO vision. To prevent current disparate processes across

multiple Echelons from inhibiting innovation or delay the delivery of digital transformation, a

monumental paradigm shift had to be strategically directed.

The reality of ‘do more with less’ as well as the challenges faced above, lead the IT EXCOMM

to establish a Digital Transformation Team (DTT) to aggressively expand transformation efforts

across the LOG FAM. In defining the future of LOG IT systems, the Transformation Team has

anchored LOG IT transformation to concepts captured under the “cloud computing” label. Cloud

computing is the on-demand, rapid and elastic use of easily managed pooled resources

accessed via public or private networks with minimal upfront cost or no long-term commitment.

Given that cloud is a key enabler of several of the key aspects of digital transformation, careful

consideration must be taken to establish and monitor the cloud migration journey. The strategic

maturity considerations will be detailed in the Digital Transformation Plan, while technical details

for cloud migration, including the Enterprise Technical Reference Framework (ETRF) will be

resident in the Technology Plan. The remainder of this document will focus on highlighting the

portfolio management and application rationalization dependencies in consideration as LOG

FAM actualizes the digital transformation vision set in the Digital Transformation Plan.

As the concept of rationalization is discussed throughout the document, it is important to

standardize several of the terms being used such as system and application. The DoD definition

of a system is a discrete set of information resources organized for the collection, processing,

6 Memo from the Under Secretary of the Navy Regarding Restructure of Secretariat Functions, 2018



• Ensure IT investments support the

Department’s vision, mission, and goals;

• Ensure efficient and effective delivery of

capabilities to the warfighter; and

• Maximize return on investment to the

Enterprise

maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination, or disposition of information7. While the definition of

an application is broader and is a software program hosted by an information system7. Most of

the LOG IT portfolio is comprised of systems, which are made up of various applications. When

the term is applied to rationalization, it is meant to be understood that application rationalization

will also cover DoD systems.

Other concepts that are significant to the transformation

vision are the ideas of Modernization Vectors and

rationalization within the portfolio, both of which are defined

to the right. Most systems will be aligned to the

Modernization Vectors, which are the best-in-breed vehicles

to drive digital transformation while rationalization is the

process that will be used to modernize the portfolio. These

concepts will be discussed further in the “As-Is and Desired

To-Be” and “Application Portfolio Rationalization” sections while their relation to the Core

Functions of IT Portfolio Management will be discussed in the next section.

Core Functions of IT Portfolio Management

When applied to IT, the portfolio becomes

the grouping of IT investments by capability

to accomplish a specific functional goal,

objective, or mission outcome. The DoD

mandates the management of IT

investments in portfolios to accomplish the goals listed on the right:

The DoD further establishes policy that each portfolio is managed using the relevant

architectures, plans, risk management techniques, capability goals and objectives, and

performance measures. To align IT portfolios that are focused on the delivery of business

capability, DoD has established a Business Mission Area (BMA). The IT investments managed

by the Navy LOG FAM strategically align to the processes addressed within the BMA. As the

journey to digital continues, the LOG FAM must reevaluate the existing processes to manage IT

investments in accordance with established DoD and Navy IT PfM policies. However,

reevaluating processes alone without proper coordination on the policy enhancements required

for existing Navy IT PfM policy will only serve to intensify problems faced today. Simply stated,

current Navy IT PfM policy from 2009 creates an environment that overly burdens portfolio

managers and has not kept pace with technological advances in IT. This document will not

undertake the analytical processes needed to document IT PfM policy dependencies but will

serve as guidance to LOG FAM program teams to work within existing laws, regulations,

policies, and guidelines (LRPGs).

7 DoDI 8500.2 “Information Assurance (IA) Implementation”, 2003



IT Portfolio Management is the balanced management of risk and the effective delivery of IT

assets to warfighters. This is accomplished by evaluating investments in IT to identify ways to

leverage existing and planned IT assets that provide similar functions. IT PfM requires the

implementation of an iterative process of analysis, selection, control, and evaluation that mirrors

process used in financial sectors to manage the collection of assets to achieve the maximum

return on investment while limiting the level of risk to the organization. The DoD policy regarding

the four core functions are depicted in Figure 1 below8.

Figure 1: Four Core Function of IT Portfolio Management Policy

These four core functions can be extended to support digital transformation by applying the

following strategic actions in Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Four Core Functions of IT Portfolio Management Strategic Actions

8 Department of Defense Directive Number 8115.01 Regarding Information Technology Portfolio Management, 2005

Analysis

• Policy: Links portfolio objectives to Enterprise vision, mission, goals, objectives, and priorities; develops quantifiable outcome-based performance measures; identifies capability gaps, opportunities, and redundancies; identifies risks; and provides for continuous process improvement.

Selection

• Policy: Identifies and selects the best mix of IT investments to strengthen and achieve capability goals and objectives for the portfolio and demonstrates the impact of alternative IT investment strategies and funding levels.

Control

• Policy: Ensures a portfolio is managed and monitored using established quantifiable outcome-based performance measures. Portfolios are monitored and evaluated against portfolio performance measures to determine whether to recommend continuation, modification, or termination of individual investments within the portfolio.

Evaluation

• Policy: Measures actual contributions of the portfolio against established outcome-based performance measures to determine improved capability as well as support adjustments to the mix of portfolio investments, as necessary.

Analysis

• Strategic Actions: Align all systems within the portfolio to the approved Logistics mission outcomes and service hierarchy as documented in the DTT Service Plan. Conduct technical and functional health assessment on all systems to provide a quantitative evaluation, as described in Appendix A of this document.

Selection

• Strategic Actions: Align all mission and IT capabilities to the 9 modernization vectors, defined in the “Background” section, based on functionality and services provided. Use the rationalization process outlined in the “Application Portfolio Rationalization” section later in this document as guidance to identify systems that will be sunset, sustained, and optimized. Conduct analysis on the outcome of the rationalization process to determine the effect on funding.

Control

• Strategic Actions: Adopt the use of SoftwareAG ARIS and Alfabet to aide in enterprise architecture, portfolio management, and process improvement. Follow guidance on proposed governance board for managing the portfolio, and ongoing identification and management of readiness capabilities.

Evaluation

• Strategic Actions: Continually track the health of systems within the portfolio and use clearly defined metrics to monitor the portfolios status. Track funding mix of portfolio over time as systems are sunset and the money is reallocated to the modernization vectors.



Document Purpose

From a strategic point of view, this document seeks to support the cultural shift on how the LOG

FAM Portfolio allocates resources to align with digital transformation. Instead of Program Offices

only thinking about how budgeting and resources affect their sphere of influence, a holistic view

of Portfolio Management at the Navy Logistics level needs to be taken to achieve successful

digital transformation. This cultural shift is required to embrace digital and disrupt the way

resources are allocated to align to innovation and digital capabilities. Without drastic changes,

the time scale to enable digital capabilities such as additive manufacturing, artificial intelligence

and analytics, or predictive maintenance will continue to be years rather than months.

From an operational point of view, this document seeks to provide guidance on system

rationalization and PfM. It will be used as a mechanism to drive digital logistics services by LOG

FAM Portfolio Owners and corresponding Program Offices as they either continue the

rationalization efforts they have underway or begin this process for the first time. It is meant to

be used in conjunction with any other LRPGs provided and serve as an aide to lay the

foundation for standard PfM in the LOG FAM while accomplishing effective and timely system

rationalization.



Assessment

As part of the Fall 2017 Digital Transformation Assessment, Navy stakeholders were asked

approximately 200 questions, and 26 percent of invitees completed the survey. Below are the

key findings, impacts, and recommendations regarding the Portfolio Management and

Application Rationalization questions asked.



Shore Maintenance of Ships • NMMES – Navy Maritime Maintenance Enterprise

Solution: N97, NAVSEA 04

• NMMES-TR – NMMES Technical Refresh: N97, NAVSEA

04 / PEO(EIS) PMS-444

Naval Aviation Enterprise • NDMS – NAVAIR Depot Management System:

NWCF, COMFRC

• ALE – Aviation Logistics Environment / Vision

2020: N98, NAVAIR 6.0

Operational Forces Material Readiness • NAMS – Naval Aviation Maintenance System: N41,

PEO(C4I) PMW-150

• NOSS – Navy Operational Supply System: N41, PEO(C4I)

PMW-150

• NOME – Navy Operational Maintenance Environment:

N41, PEO(C4I) PMW-150

• CBM+ ES – Condition-Based Maintenance Plus

Enterprise Solution: N96, NAVSEA 05

Finance & Supply Chain Management • ERP – Navy Enterprise Resource Planning: N41,

PEO(EIS) PMW-220

Figure 3: LOGFAM Modernization Vectors

As-Is State and Desired To-Be State

As-Is

Currently, Portfolio Management and Application Rationalization are performed in a limited

capacity across the LOG FAM. In the cases where these actions are performed, they occur in

silos across the FAM, with individual guidelines and processes implemented due to outdated

policy and guidance. As an example, the most recent IT PfM policy for Navy is dated 2009. Due

to the lack of guidance and oversight over the portfolio, it has ballooned to over 230 active

systems and over 1,600 active applications, most of which are performing duplicative functions.

Because of the current culture within the LOG FAM, the portfolio lacks the ability to curb

expansion as unique solutions are created for common problems. The current thought process

will prevent common solutions for common problems. To this end, the LOG FAM has taken an

aggressive first step by establishing nine modernization vectors to begin rethinking the way

future resources will be allocated to enable digital transformation. The current nine vectors are

aligned by an overall functional purpose; see below:

All systems within the portfolio are officially managed in either the DoD IT Portfolio Repository -

Department of Navy (DITPR - DON) or DON Application and Database Management System

(DADMS). The accuracy of information in these systems varies due to infrequent updates and

the ever-changing landscape of the logistics portfolio. With no unified, commonly used, or

consistently updated tool being used for Portfolio Management, key metrics such as lifecycle,

budget, and functionality are not being tracked or recorded to allow for proper overview and

management of systems. When the information collected is not accurate or complete, this

creates an environment where users must rely on low-fidelity data to make high-fidelity

decisions.

MATERIAL

READINESS



There currently does not exist a common Application Rationalization Framework to aide in the

assessment and ultimate disposition of systems within the portfolio. This, along with the lack of

Portfolio Management, is a contributing factor to why the portfolio has become so large,

unmanageable, and unable to be audited.

To-Be

As the LOG FAM embarks on the journey towards cloud migration, application rationalization

plays a major role in the process. As demonstrated by Amazon and Microsoft (Figure 4 and

Figure 5), cloud migration typically includes a planning, evaluation, migration, and operation

phase, with application rationalization occurring during the evaluation phase. While other cloud

service providers exist, Amazon’s and Microsoft’s cloud migration processes were provided

based on their placement as the top two leaders worldwide in Cloud Infrastructure as a Service

based on Gartner’s 2017 Magic Quadrant9.

Figure 4: Amazon Cloud Migration Process10

Figure 5: Microsoft Cloud Migration Process11

As previously stated, rationalization is carried out by the Program Offices, in silos, without

considering the portfolio in its entirety. In the future, the rationalization process needs to be

more holistic, driven by a strategy and roadmap, while considering the overlaps and gaps of the

entire portfolio. A discussed earlier in this document, the Modernization Vectors play a large role

in the digital transformation process. These Vectors are ultimately supporting the Service

Hierarchy described in the Service Plan, which will be operationalized through the ETRF. Refer

to Figure 6 below to see how we will guide the rationalization of systems to reduce unnecessary

9 Magic Quadrant for Cloud Infrastructure as a Service, 2017 10 Amazon Cloud Migration Process, https://aws.amazon.com/cloud-migration/, 2018 11 Microsoft Cloud Migration Process, https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/migration/, 2018

https://aws.amazon.com/cloud-migration/

https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/migration/



and no value add technology while increasing value add services and drive Logistics Mission

Outcomes.

Figure 6. Digital Transformation Vision

Closely mirroring industry best practices, this vision shows the current state of applications each

having their own services, data, and technology, which is how they operate. The system’s

functionality will be transferred, using the Modernization Vectors, to a shared services platform

in the future, enabled by cloud and digital, as outlined in the Technology Plan. For this transition

to be effective, systems must be aligned with and rationalized within one of the Modernization

Vectors. Along with the current mindset around rationalization needing to be changed, there

also needs to be an up to date and industry standard process put in place to guide and govern

portfolio rationalization. While the “Application Portfolio Rationalization section of this document

covers the specific guidance surrounding how to perform rationalization, below gives a high

level strategic view of what rationalization may look like in the future.

In the future, the rationalization process could take the form of a “application rationalization

factory”, depicted in Figure 7, where the rationalization process is conducted by the Program

Offices who are in line with LOG IT EXCOMM strategic vision and have oversight of their line of

service within the portfolio. This is necessary because it begins to implement the idea of

governance across the portfolio and allows decisions to made for the benefit of the entire

portfolio rather than spheres of influence, as it is done today.



• Collapsing unique infrastructure to leverage a common digital platform – this

component will require the use of business process engineering to document the

necessary parameters for the creation of domain driven application program

interfaces (APIs)

• Analysis of unique and common requirements to drive common solutions

(rationalization) – this component incorporates the rationalization process outlined

in the document to leverage common application solutions when possible and

unique solutions otherwise

• Validation and optimization of the service offering – this component is covered in

the Service Plan

Figure 7. Proposed Application Rationalization Factory

The major components of the factory depicted in Figure 7 include:

By standardizing and bringing together disparate processes that are performed across the LOG

FAM, Program Offices will have a common process by which to rationalize systems aligned to

them. Leveraging a technical subject matter expert (SME) and a functional SME will allow

Program Offices to accurately evaluate systems using guidance described in the next section of

this document.



1. Establish an Enterprise view through consistent processes, guidelines, and business

governance

2. Reduce cost through elimination of duplicative systems

3. Improve quality and security through standardization of infrastructure and interfaces

4. Avoid surprises / ad-hoc remediation through standard guidelines and central

enforcement

5. Ensure business continuity through stable and up-to-date platforms

6. Improve security and compliance through enforced security guidelines via

governance

7. Support LOGFAM financial audit by modernizing deficient systems and applications

Application Portfolio Rationalization

Application Portfolio Rationalization can be described as the process to assess the functional

and technical health of applications and identify opportunities to improve capabilities, simplify

the environment, and reduce costs. As it applies to the LOG FAM, application portfolio

rationalization will be performed to the individual applications as well as the portfolio as a whole.

Using this evaluation, decisions will be made to reduce the duplicative functions being

performed across the LOG FAM and move towards a modernized, digitally enabling portfolio.

To provide regulation of the processes that takes place in the rationalization portion of the

application rationalization factory, certain tenets must be established. The following seven

guiding principles should be kept in mind throughout the entire rationalization process and used

as input for decision making.

These guiding principles influence the outcomes that should be achieved through accurate

application rationalization and highlight the benefits of a well maintained and managed portfolio.

These principles represent industry standards and have been socialized to LOG FAM

stakeholders via regular check points and as part of the digital transformation assessment follow

on workshops.

Approach

The Application Rationalization approach, central to the application rationalization factory

concept, is the process by which all applications within the portfolio will be analyzed, evaluated,

and disposed following industry standard practices. The process is supported by a set of steps

shown in Figure 8 below.

Figure 8: Application Rationalization Approach



At a high level the approach is broken into three phases:

Project Plan and Timeline

As described, to start this process, a project plan and timeline must be developed to lay out the

entire rationalization process in an agile fashion. The plan should show the steps that need to

be taken throughout the process and significant milestones or checkpoints that occur. Below is

an example of a project plan and timeline (Figure 9).

Figure 9: Example Project Timeline and Actions

Current State Analysis

The goal of this phase is to validate the current state of all system to identify areas for

innovation. Questions pertaining to lifecycle stage, categorization of services provided, and

costs are answered. It is important to get the most accurate and up to date view of the portfolio

through the data sources currently available such as DITPR - DON or Program Budget

Information System-IT (PBIS-IT). Additionally, interviews with Program Offices and System

Owners should be conducted. In identifying all the questions needing to be answered up front,

gaps can be identified, and solutions can be proposed. This will make the rationalization

process streamlined and more accurate.

Phase 1

Starts with the development of a project plan and timeline, while ending with a current state assessment. This phase sets the scope of the work and sets the stage for the analysis.

Phase 2

Begins with an initial assessment of applications leveraging the results from Phase 1 and concludes with the disposition of applications based on industry standard criteria.

Phase 3

Using the application dispositions from Phase 2, applications are characterized into the different lifecycle phases based on their health. The approach culminates with the development of a roadmap and transition plan to guide the modernization process moving forward.



• Services

• Ownership and Usage

• Functionality

• Financial Information, including

budget and actuals

• Investments and Upgrades

• Lifecycle

• Technical Composition and

Interfaces

Rationalization Levers

1. Eliminate redundancy through platform

standardization

2. Align application criticality to service

levels

3. Optimize / sunset applications that are

past end of service life

4. Enhance/Replace high incident critical

applications

5. Consolidate applications with multiple

instances

6. Explore COTS to supplant heavily

customized solutions

7. Reduce interface complexity to simplify

environment

The examples are based on industry best practices

and knowledge, and represent the types of information

to collect on each system:

Collecting all this data will provide a good view on the

status of the system and its functionality.

Along with the information collected on the left,

functional and technical health assessment workbooks

should be utilized by LOG IT systems. Sample

questions from these assessment workbooks can be

seen in Appendix A. These assessments contain very

detailed questions relating to the functional and

technical health of systems and should be incorporated into interviews or data requests with

Program Managers. When completed in full, the output from these assessments offer a detailed

view into the health of systems in the portfolio and provide an in-depth assessment of systems

against one another. The data will also be used later in the rationalization process, so it is

important that it is completed with a high level of accuracy and detail.

An initial system inventory has been assembled by the DTT by leveraging DITPR –DON and

interviews with stakeholders within the LOG FAM. The inventory for all 230+ systems in the

LOG IT portfolio, with a preliminary mapping to digital transformation services and Vector, will

be provided in the future. There is still an incomplete action at the Vector level to perform a

similar inventory of all rationalizing systems and the underlying applications. This will be utilized

to document as much information as possible to drive decision making.

Initial Assessment

Once the current state analysis has been completed, an initial assessment can begin to see

preliminary results from the analyzed data. This initial assessment helps to visually represent

the current state of the portfolio and make it easy to identify key problem areas.

Evaluating applications against the seven

rationalization levers listed to the right

serves as the first step in assessing the

portfolio’s health and could produce

results that guide the rest of the

rationalization process. Results from the

analysis can take graphical form as

illustrated in the example shown below in

Figure 10. Using these charts makes it

easy to determine problem areas and

provides senior leadership with an ability

to quickly assess the portfolio against

predefined metrics.



Figure 10. Example of life cycle analysis

Although the chart above is being used for illustrative purposes, a few observations are easily

seen regarding the health of the portfolio in question related to life cycle. The first take away is

that around 65% of systems in the sample portfolio are operating past the end of their life cycle.

This raises immediate concerns about the health of the portfolio and the update cycle currently

in place to either sunset or refresh applications as they near end of life. A portfolio that contains

most systems past their end of life exposes itself to many risks the longer these systems are not

remediated. The other major take away from this chart is that the life cycle is unknown for 27%

of the systems. This raises questions of data availability and accuracy. Every system within a

portfolio should have its life cycle phase recorded, tracked, and updated throughout the course

of its existence. Not having life cycle information again exposes the portfolio to risk and shows a

lack of portfolio management.

The observations of the chart above represent real problems that could be occurring within a

portfolio without knowledge of it happening. The outcome of realizing these problems and

drawing attention to them is an output of assessing the systems using the levers provided

above. When assessment is performed across all seven levers, a high-level health assessment

of the portfolio is realized that can drive actions moving forward.

System Disposition

After the initial assessment has been performed to identify high level problem areas, the next

step is to carry out the system dispositions. This is done at the individual application level and

involves looking at each one through the rationalization lenses depicted below in Figure 11.



Figure 11. Rationalization lenses

The five lenses each represent different industry standard views of evaluating systems and are

assessed independently from each other. When they are combined they offer a holistic view on

the adequacy and alignment of systems. Within each of the five lenses there are evaluation

questions that can be asked about each system, which feed into creating the 10 industry

standard disposition factors detailed below. Each disposition factor is directly tied to one of the

five rationalization lenses and relate very closely to the rationalization levers.

Systems can be evaluated individually or against one another using the 10 disposition factors,

along with the technical and functional health assessment scores. Below is an example of an

evaluation of 7 systems using the 10 disposition factors along with the functional and technical

health assessment (Figure 12) as well as sample criteria with which to evaluate systems against

(Figure 13).

Disposition Factors

1. Business Criticality 6. Proximity to EOSL

2. Functional Health 7. Incident Rate

3. Technical Health 8. Customization

4. Functional Redundancy 9. Interfaces

5. Number of Instances 10. Cost



Figure 12. Sample Disposition Matrix

Figure 13. Sample Disposition Criteria with Cross-Industry Standards

Looking at Figure 12, it becomes clear which applications are performing better than others

based on the color coding. This form of evaluation also easily brings into focus individual

problems that applications have as well as overall problems that the systems in the portfolio

face. From the figure, it is easy to see that besides the top application, all other applications

evaluated scored poorly on the technical health assessment and have high incident rates. By

performing this disposition of applications under their control, Program Offices will be able to

determine not only applications that are performing well, but applications that are issues.



1. Sunset: Systems that have scored poorly on the assessment and functionality can be

taken over by an existing system or Vector; have been previously tagged for

decommission

2. Sustain: Systems that scored middle of the road on the assessment but provide key

functionality that cannot be performed by another system

3. Optimize: Systems that scored above average but require minimum enhancements to

support the digital future

Characterization and Lifecycle

Using the application disposition completed above, Program Offices will characterize all

systems into one of three categories detailed below. In doing so, Program Offices will be able to

realize the current mix of systems under their purview and determine where budgets can be

diverted away from legacy systems and reallocated to new transformative and modernizing

efforts.

In addition to the three categories described above, there is a fourth category, Innovation. This

category is reserved for the Modernization Vectors that represent large scale investments in

moving to the digital future. The proposed categorization process and lifecycle is depicted below

(Figure 14). As stated, all systems within the LOG IT portfolio will exist in either the Sunset,

Sustain, or Optimize phase based on their assessment results. The main exception is for the

Modernization Vectors, which will align to the Innovation category. After a system completes the

activities in either the Innovation or Optimization phase, it will move into a constant phase of

Sustainment where it will be maintained until such time as an Optimization phase will be

required to update and refresh the system.

Figure 14: Proposed System Lifecycle Process



The goal of the categorization process is to determine the select subset of Vectors and systems

that can provide all relevant services for readiness capabilities. By rationalizing systems that

provide duplicative functions and selecting the ’best-in-breed’, the LOG FAM portfolio will

become more streamlined and realize a cost savings to increase readiness and become better

equipped to handle the Navy Logistics mission.

Roadmap and Transition Plan

After the initial rationalization has been completed and systems have been assigned to their

categories, a roadmap and transition plan will need to be created by each Vector. These

roadmaps and transition plans will aide in the modernization efforts of each Vector and offer

guidance moving forward. The roadmap will also provide high level visibility of actions in

process to collapse portfolio systems into services aimed at delivering specific functionality.

The system roadmap shows when systems or applications will be sunset, have their

functionality transferred, maintained into the future, or optimized and will include movement for

each Vector. Below is an example of a roadmap that shows systems being brought into the

Vector as well as systems being sunset (Figure 15).

Figure 15: Sample Vector Roadmap

The transition plan will lay out how all the rationalizing systems will be integrated with the Vector

and provide the Who, What, When, and How they will be transitioned and managed in the

future. To aide in the development of the transition plan, a template will be provided for

guidance. Below is a sample transition timeline that shows all the various workstreams that

need to be accounted for when going through the transition (Figure 16).



IT Governance Frameworks

• International Organization for Standards

/ International Electrotechnical

Commission (ISO/IEC) 38500

• Control Objectives for Information and

Related Technologies (COBIT)

• Information Technology Infrastructure

Library (ITIL)

• Responsibility

• Strategy

• Acquisition

• Performance

• Conformance

• Human Behavior

Figure 16: Sample Transition Timeline

Portfolio Management and Governance

The General Services Administration (GSA)

defines IT Portfolio Management as “a risked

based approach to the selection and

management of IT projects integrating business

and IT planning, budgeting, standards,

processes, and governance”. Governance is

further defined as a formal set of processes,

communication forums, roles, responsibilities,

and tools that are executed at all levels of an

organization. Within IT there are many

governance frameworks, each with their benefits

and disadvantages. A sampling of frameworks is shown above. When governance is effectively

implemented across an entire organization, it aligns with and supports the ISO 38500 principles

of:

Along with the principles on the left, the goal of governance is to

aide in investment and prioritization, request management,

issue management, dispute management, auditing, planning,

and performance reporting.

1 15 29 12 26 12 26 9 23 7 21

Jan-13 Feb-13 Mar-13 Apr-13 May-13

Service Readiness

Transition Management

Communications

Enable People

Transfer Knowledge

Service Management

Contract & Finance Mgmt

Implement Technology

START GO LIVE

Transition Planning Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Stabilization

QA CheckDetailed

planscompleted

QA Check

QA Check

QA Check

QA Check

QA Check

QA Check

Execute Communication PlanComm Plan Handover to Unit

People PlanningRecruiting Begins

OnboardingExecute Rebadging, onboarding, HR communication strategy

Agent Training & ShadowingKT BeginsKT Plans

Completed

Svc Mgmt Assessment Complete

Svc Mgmt Tool Req Complete

Service & GovernanceModels Complete

Initiate Baseline PeriodHandover to Unit

Configure Tools

Contract Signature

Contract Summary

Compliance TrackingProcedures Complete

Contract & Financial MgtProcedures Agreed

TechnologyPlan Complete

Initiate Tools & Tech Builds

Connectivity Established

Component Testing Component Testing Completed

Prepare for Service Rehearsals & Test Scripts

Svc Readiness Planning Complete

Service Rehearsals Executed

Go LiveAuthorization



As portfolio rationalization moves from unstructured to defined processes, a governance model

will be crucial to continued alignment and improvement. Additionally, as the portfolio undergoes

substantial modernization and rationalization,

it becomes imperative that a comprehensive

and effective Portfolio Management and

Governance approach be created and

implemented. To the left is a proposed

governance model (Figure 17) that is designed

to support ISO 38500 principles while creating

a collaborative governance board structure.

The governance board would report on

transformation efforts and be chaired by

representatives of the DCNO N4 and N9 but

have representation from all nine Vectors.

Within this model, a hierarchy becomes

present where each of the Vectors now become responsible for their own progress towards

transformation as well as the transition and transformation of sub-systems that have been

aligned to them.

As PfM becomes more and more complex, defining the governance model, including a stage

gate process, decision criteria and authority rights is critical to achieving a positive outcome.

Questions like:

“Who is going to manage the portfolio, both at the LOG FAM and system level?”;

“How does an optimal portfolio management process integrate with other core

processes?”; and

“What behavioral and/or functional changes will be needed across the enterprise?”;

need to be answered up front to lay the foundation for processes moving forward. Additional

governance samples are included in Appendix B.

To aide in portfolio and process management, the LOG FAM can adopt the use of technology

that can enforce governance behavior. A software suite such as SoftwareAG’s ARIS and Alfabet

is an example of software designed to aid in process improvement and portfolio management.

While the two software tools provide distinct services, they interact and integrate with each other

to share information and support the Business and IT Transformation process.

One function of the ARIS software is to provide Business Process Analysis through its Process

Transformation and Management Platform. This platform allows users to understand the

processes within their business, align them to their strategy, and manage them effectively

moving forward. The other function that ARIS provides is a Governance, Risk, and Compliance

Management Platform. Within this platform, users can adapt faster to new regulations, identify

and decrease risks, and simplify the audit process.

Alfabet is a software tool that works in conjunction with ARIS to provide IT Portfolio

Management. By providing road maps based on enterprise strategy, cost and risk analysis, and

Figure 17: Proposed Governance Model



multi-dimensional portfolio analysis, Alfabet supports the transformation process and seeks to

provide guidance throughout the entre process.

Conclusion: Next Steps

As the LOG FAM continues to drive towards Digital Transformation, the proposed Application

Rationalization Framework and Governance Model will be key in offering guidance on Portfolio

Management moving forward. Program Offices will be able to use the guidance provided in this

document to take control of the systems aligned to them and begin implementing a standardized

rationalization approach. In doing so, systems can begin to be placed on transformation

roadmaps based on their lifecycle characterization and a path to the Digital Future can start to

take shape.

As discussed in the previous section, Governance needs to be established early on across the

entire LOG FAM. Without everyone following a standard set of procedures and processes, the

Digital Transformation Journey will encounter barriers. Within the idea of Governance,

acquisition and adoption of a set of software tools to aide in the process improvement and

portfolio management is important to reduce the burden on users and automate as much as

possible. Continued use of manual processes will not allow for Digital Transformation.

As mentioned previously in this document, the DTT has begun the initial process of assessing

the current state of the portfolio using existing DON tools and stakeholder interviews. While this

analysis serves as a good starting point, a deeper analysis needs to be performed on the entire

portfolio using the guidance provided in this document. Program Offices have control over and

work with the systems within the portfolio everyday thus they represent the best source of

information when it comes to individual systems and applications. Leveraging their knowledge

and commitment to change will be key in the Digital Transformation Journey.



Appendix A: Functional and Technical Health Assessment Examples

Below are sample questions from the functional and technical health assessment workbooks.

Full versions of the assessments will be distributed to the LOG FAM in the future.



Appendix B: Sample Governance Model



Appendix C: Sample Portfolio Management Mission, Vision, and Strategic Goals

The table below is an example of the future enhancements that will be incorporated into this

plan. The strategic goals and objectives will be updated as the LOG FAM continues to drive

rationalization efforts across Echelon I and in conjunction with standardized processes at

Echelon II.

Logistics IT PfM Mission

Enable a streamlined portfolio of modernized IT investments intended to harness disruptive

digital technologies aimed at advancing Fleet Readiness and Logistics.

Logistics IT PfM Vision

Modernize the governance structure and processes underpinning the LOG FAM portfolio to

manage the delivery of Navy Logistics IT systems designed to achieve the best value for

resources programmed and executed.

Strategic Goal 1

“Rationalize the

portfolio”

Provide a clear,

concise, and

complete LOG IT

Portfolio

Strategic Goal 2

“Responsibly

manage IT

resources” Safeguard

financial resources

through the cost-

effective

management of IT

solutions.

Strategic Goal 3

“Realign to support

the enterprise”

Support current

strategic guidance

and policies.

Strategic Goal 4

“Reduce unique

solutions”

Migrate from a

landscape of

multiple, complex IT

solutions performing

similar functions to

fewer strategic

solutions that enable

the mission

Objectives

1.1 Increase the

efficiency of

Department IT

investments by

streamlining IT

acquisition and

improving project

management

processes.

1.2 Still defining

1.3 Still defining

Objectives

2.1 Enable effective

decision-making by

strengthening

governance

processes.

2.2 Still defining

2.3 Still defining

Objectives

3.1 Leverage

Department of

Defense Business

Enterprise

Architecture (BEA)

principles to improve

interoperability and

compliance with

Navy policy, and

standards.

3.2 Still defining

3.3 Still defining

Objectives

Still defining

Table 1: Logistics IT Mission, Vision, and Strategic Goal



Digital Transformation Data Plan Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Fleet Readiness & Logistics,


Manager (LOGFAM)

5/29/2018



Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 4

Guiding Principles ...................................................................................................................... 5

Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 5

Scope ..................................................................................................................................... 5

Vision ..................................................................................................................................... 5

Goals ...................................................................................................................................... 5

Principles ................................................................................................................................ 7

Digital Transformation LOG IT Assessment ............................................................................... 7

Data Challenges ..................................................................................................................... 7

Findings and Impacts ............................................................................................................. 9

Digital Transformation Plan ........................................................................................................ 9

Enterprise Data Reference Framework .....................................................................................10

Emerging Technologies ............................................................................................................11

Data Governance ......................................................................................................................13

Digital Data Workforce ..............................................................................................................15

Data Characterization ...............................................................................................................16

Data Standards .........................................................................................................................17

Authoritative Data Sources .......................................................................................................19

Appendix ...................................................................................................................................20

Implementation Guidance ......................................................................................................20

References ............................................................................................................................20

Logistics Data Working Group Participants ............................................................................21

Data Standards .....................................................................................................................22

Data Digital Workforce Crosswalk .........................................................................................23



List of Figures FIGURE 1. DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION JOURNEY FOR DATA ........................................................................................................ 4 FIGURE 2. LOGISTICS MISSION OUTCOMES .............................................................................................................................. 6 FIGURE 3. DATA CHALLENGES AND MITIGATION EFFORTS .......................................................................................................... 8 FIGURE 4. DATA FINDINGS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS – FEBRUARY 2018 ................................................................ 9 FIGURE 5. HIGHLIGHTS OF THE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION PLAN ............................................................................................... 10 FIGURE 6. ENTERPRISE DATA REFERENCE FRAMEWORK (EDRF) ................................................................................................ 10 FIGURE 7. SPECTRUM OF AUTOMATION ................................................................................................................................ 12 FIGURE 8. LOGISTICS DATA GOVERNANCE ............................................................................................................................. 14 FIGURE 9. DIGITAL ROLES FOR DATA PERSONNEL.................................................................................................................... 15 FIGURE 10: EXAMPLES OF DIGITAL WORKFORCE DATA ROLES ................................................................................................... 16 FIGURE 11. S SERIES REPRESENTATION AND OVERLAPS WITH GEIA AND MIL STANDARDS ............................................................. 18 FIGURE 12. LOGISTICS IT DATA ROADMAP ............................................................................................................................ 20 FIGURE 13. PRODUCT DATA RELATED STANDARDS.................................................................................................................. 22 FIGURE 14. EXAMPLE DATA STANDARDS ............................................................................................................................... 22 FIGURE 15: DIGITAL DATA ROLES ........................................................................................................................................ 23



Executive Summary The Logistics (LOG) IT Digital Transformation Data Plan (hereinafter referred to as the “Data

Plan”) presents a holistic, enterprise approach to building a data-driven environment for the

Department of the Navy (DON) that moves data at the speed of the mission. The Data Plan is a

culmination of numerous collaboration activities, including the Logistics Data Working Group

meetings, as well as the LOG IT Assessment survey and interviews of system and program

stakeholders within the Fleet Readiness and Logistics Division (OPNAV N4).

The Data Plan outlines the efforts to eliminate data silos and streamline capabilities to glean

useful insight from data, allowing better informed readiness and logistics decisions to drive to

the ideal “Digital Navy.” Currently, there are thousands of data sources that exist in pockets

across the Navy. The key goal is to promote transparency of data throughout its lifecycle. This

document provides actionable goals aligned to people, processes, and technology changes

while coupling them with best practices in data governance and management. The goals are

derived from identified pain points and information collected from continuous dialogue and

analysis. Ultimately, this plan will push to create trustworthy, auditable, and accessible

information that is visible where it needs to be, when it needs to be there.

Figure 1. Digital Transformation Journey for Data

A more mature and effectively architected data environment allows for maximum effective use

of resources. Scenarios that could be realized by implementing the Data Plan include:

1. Maintainers know exactly which equipment and which part on that equipment needs to be

repaired before they start work each day

2. Maintenance and supply personnel able to plan and manage local, regional and enterprise

spare parts inventory, having early warning of each part that was going to fail and when

3. High fidelity data enabling analytics in support of readiness decisions and logistics actions

4. Deployed equipment providing continuous updates on operating efficiency, plus

recommended actions, on every piece of equipment under control

5. Mitigate submission of work orders that include mis-identified parts

6. Maintainers receive parts and supplies within hours of finding an unexpected failure

7. Use of analytics to see the ship that needs to be seen

8. More time spent replacing water pumps instead of doing paperwork about replacing water

pumps

Implementation of this plan will cut down on unnecessary costs, increase the confidence level of

the data, and improve readiness.



Guiding Principles

Purpose The Data Plan is designed by OPNAV N4 with the intent to serve as an interactive blueprint to

drive the DON logistics systems from the federated and low-fidelity current state towards a more

holistic and mission focused future state.

Scope Endorsed by the Logistics IT Executive Committee (LOG IT EXCOMM) and executed by the

Logistics Functional Area Manager (LOG FAM), this plan will apply to all systems and users

existing within the LOG FAM portfolio. The implementation of this plan will be governed by the

LOG FAM leadership to ensure maximum return on readiness investments and capabilities.

This document provides a high-level outline to System Owners, Program Offices, and Action

Officers on realizing the future of Navy data, while providing more detailed steps to those

involved in handling and managing data on a day-to-day basis.

Vision Logistics data needs to move at the speed of the mission, not at the speed of the infrastructure.

Successful implementation of best practices and recommendations will ensure that the right

data, with the right quality, is in the right place at the right time. As the DON and mission-

readiness needs evolve, the data must adapt accordingly.

Goals Data is the fuel for making logistics readiness decisions and taking effective actions. Therefore,

the goals of the Data Plan directly support logistics readiness and more specifically, mission

outcomes. Mission outcomes represent what mission success looks like, both operationally and

in terms of what problems need to be addressed. Figure 2 shows the Digital Transformations

Team Mission Outcomes approved by the LOG IT EXCOMM on April 10, 2018.



To enable the mission outcomes, the goal of the Data Plan is to enable people to make well-

informed business decisions from the data they have. To do so, the data must be:

1. Auditable – the enterprise will document logistics transactions through several lenses,

including from research and development to disposal, from ashore to afloat, and from

requirement to expenditure.

2. Visible – leveraging human centered design will ensure that users can get the data they

need and, more importantly, the knowledge from the data they need when they need it.

3. Trustworthy – users will understand the pedigree of the data and have confidence in

the data to consider it as authoritative in making high fidelity readiness decisions.

4. Accessible – metadata will support user-generated and automated discovery, reporting

and analytics across the enterprise and to external stakeholders.1

The Data Plan goals must align to the mission outcomes. For example, innovative technologies

like blockchain can improve the auditability of data throughout the digital thread to support

mission outcomes such as “improved resupply time and accuracy” and “simplified and expedited

decision making.” The digital twin cannot exist without high quality data, which all the goals of

this Data Plan support to ensure maximum achievable fidelity. Automation technologies that

supports repair and replace maintenance actions can be used to improve data quality and

therefore “reduce the failure rate”, “improve repair time”, and “improve resupply time and

accuracy”. Technologies that provide capabilities such as a high-performance, distributed

processing platform and in memory compute will make data accessible for a wide range of

users and uses including machine learning and graphing in support of the readiness outcomes.

1 These goals are consistent with DoD Instruction 8320.07, “Implementing the Sharing of Data, Information and IT Services in the DoD”, 5 December 2017.

Figure 2. Logistics Mission Outcomes



Principles The principles serve as the foundation for the implementation of the goals. The principles

introduce an agile and accessible environment that is collaborative and implemented to scale.

While multiple data initiatives exist across the enterprise, it is imperative to consolidate and

focus on implementing capabilities that address common needs of readiness stakeholders. This

maximizes use of data and relevant capabilities across the enterprise as logistics processes are

executed each day to meet readiness goals. The principles targeted by this document are

broken out into the following areas:

1. Self Service Access – Greater use of search, natural language processing, and self-

service tools for data preparation, business intelligence and reporting, and analytics

2. Rapid Insights Discovery – Investments in data discovery capabilities to identify

patterns, trends and opportunities previously unknown

3. Hybrid Framework – A strategic selection of hybrid fit-for-purpose technologies

accelerating data movement at the speed of the mission

4. Governed Data Lake – Governed and trusted data lake evolves to become the

authoritative source of data, including the evolution of data catalogs and metadata

5. Automation, Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning – Evolution of intelligent

solutions to data management challenges for data integration, data quality, and master

data management

6. Data Standards – Common language and syntax for data to provide a streamlined

process from the start to finish of the data lifecycle

Digital Transformation LOG IT Assessment

Data Challenges The LOG IT Assessment was conducted to determine the current state and elicit feedback from

stakeholders. This assessment has been followed up with in-depth interviews to identify issues

or roadblocks that currently hinder the ability to meet the requirements of mission-readiness. In

addition to interviews and assessments, a biweekly Logistics Data Working Group was

established to collaborate with stakeholders from various functional areas within OPNAV. The

Working Group spent a couple of sessions talking about issues and challenges and the

following is a list that was co-created with the members:

1. Low fidelity - Low data quality (low fidelity data) can lead to a lack of useful insights

gained from analyzing the information and ultimately lead to less than ideal decision-

making. Additionally, there are no extensive or coordinated efforts to standardize a data

quality check to ensure validity at the onset of the data lifecycle.

2. Manual data processes - Raw data from a platform is often manually and inefficiently

input into an ashore system, often resulting in a loss in translation of information and

increased opportunities for errors to be introduced to the data. As a result, this may

cause a lack of insight into analysis and tracking of information and decrease data

fidelity overall.

3. Inconsistent standards use - Interviews and surveys have shown that different groups

possess different, if any, standards or there is a high disparity between utilization of

standards. This leads to a breakdown of integration and interoperability between

systems.



4. No holistic view - Through legacy systems and stove piped processes, there are

numerous cases of data existing disparately in different data formats, with various

authoritative sources, and a lack of information sharing. As a result, there can be

duplicative efforts, a lack of a consolidated view of what data exists where, and the risk

of making misinformed business decisions.

5. Minimal data analysis - While there is an abundance of data within the enterprise there

are very few agreed upon metrics by which to utilize the data. Without correctly sharing

or integrating information, it is impossible to make well-informed decisions for the

enterprise such as an inability to forecast demands and predict maintenance repairs.

6. Outdated processes - There are numerous anecdotes within the enterprise of

electronic processes merely being a digital version of a process developed decades in

the past. The onerous paperwork and inefficient design is apparent and reduces the

speed at which the user can operate.

7. Duplication of efforts - Multiple efforts to create integrated data repositories have been

identified. Issues can arise when multiple efforts are not collaborative and coordinated,

as this can lead to multiple methodologies and standards implemented at once. This can

lead right back to silos in new segregated cloud environments between different

organizations and groups.

8. Poor data management - There is no enterprise-wide utilized process for data

archiving. With different systems having differing processes, in the event of system

recovery or new system implementation, being able to restore or port data into a new

data store could be onerous and resource intensive.

Figure 3 provides a high-level overview of how the key data challenges can be mitigated.

Achieving the goals and following the principles will help to mitigate the data challenges.

Figure 3. Data Challenges and Mitigation Efforts

Data Challenge Mitigation Effort

Low fidelity Develop quality checks for authoritative sources of data to ensure downstream information is validated

Manual processes Find and implement automation into the data collection and transfer process to minimize errors

Inconsistent standards Identify standards currently in place to work towards collaborative use of standards across domains. Ensure that authoritative data sources follow standards

No holistic view Develop an authoritative list of standards and identify end to end lifecycle of data efforts and integration points

Minimal data analysis Identify proper means of gleaning useful insight from authoritative data that is validated and adhering to standards

Outdated processes Develop a modern approach to cut down on unnecessary steps during a data lifecycle process

Duplication of efforts Create a collaborative ecosystem to ensure that every group is heard, and solutions are collectively implemented to eliminate stovepipes

Poor data management Identify enterprise solutions for data archiving and warehousing for system recovery or porting data



Findings and Impacts Figure 4 shows the findings and impact statements that were derived from the LOG IT

Assessment. The assessment collected and analyzed data from several activities including

surveys distributed throughout the portfolio, meetings with Resource Sponsors and Program

Offices, and through the OPNAV N4 Services, Technical, and Data Working Groups.

Decisions made without supporting information can lead to misguided readiness decisions and

logistics actions. One of the biggest issues uncovered from the assessment was the low fidelity

of information available to users today. While the Navy is collecting massive amounts of data,

the integrity, provenance, and auditability of the data is questionable. When quality and integrity

suffer, any amount of analysis done only yields inaccurate information. As a result, the

readiness decisions and logistics actions made from this information can lead to enterprise wide

issues.

Mitigating the risk of low fidelity data begins at the point of data origination. Some of Data Plan’s

biggest efforts will be to identify authoritative sources of data and to agree upon a published set

of data standards. Both efforts would lead to consistent and organized means of collecting,

processing and storing information. This information can then be analyzed to glean useful

insight to help support readiness decisions. Figure 4 identifies the key findings of the

assessment and the current impacts these challenges are having on the enterprise.

Figure 4. Data Findings, Implications, and Recommendations – February 2018

Digital Transformation Plan While the Data Plan is focused on guidance related to data and information, each stakeholder

responsible for working with LOG IT systems needs to understand the overarching Digital

Transformation Plan. Figure 5 shows a graphical overview of the plan and focuses on the

following areas of the digital transformation journey:

Transformation Vectors – current application portfolio will be transformed into vectors

that will drive the enterprise toward the future logistics digital state.

Logistics Services Plan - support mission outcomes, defines a service hierarchy, and

identifies the logistics personas and scenarios to accomplish the mission outcomes.



Enterprise Technical Reference Framework – enable a digital logistics IT framework that

will enable scalable, interoperable, flexible and fluid solutions. This framework includes

a Data-as-a-Service component which will be described in more detail later in this

section.

Complete details on the Digital Transformation Plan (DTP) can be found in the main body of the

DTP.

Figure 5. Highlights of the Digital Transformation Plan

Enterprise Data Reference Framework The vision for the Enterprise Data Reference Framework (EDRF) is that logistics data needs to

move at the speed of the mission, not at the speed of the infrastructure. The framework needs

to ensure the right data, with the right quality, is in the right place at the right time. The

objectives of the EDRF is to drive auditable, visible, trustworthy, and accessible data in

alignment with the goals of this Data Plan.

Figure 7 is the draft EDRF. The final version can be found on the LOG IT Digital Transformation

SharePoint site.

The EDRF is comprised of three major components:

Figure 6. Enterprise Data Reference Framework (EDRF)



1. User Interface - the point at which the user can access information via a customized

dashboard across a spectrum of devices (computers, tablets, phones, etc.) to access

and consume relevant data or data-outcomes (analytics) based on access controls

associated with the users persona (role within the organization)

2. Integrated Platform as a Service – this hybrid integration layer serves as the

connection point between the user interface and the secured cloud. In this layer, the

application programming interfaces (APIs) enable use of robust analytics and AI

capabilities

3. Secured Cloud and Detached Infrastructure – the underlying data behind the

integration platform and user interface, here the data sources are collected and

integrated into centralized data warehouses to support advanced capabilities and

analytics

Emerging Technologies Computers were originally created with the intent to compute complex mathematical formulas

faster than humans. In the years since, the role of technology has greatly expanded to make the

human more efficient and in some cases replace arduous, time consuming tasks. Emerging

technologies like automation is a way to streamline user-performed mundane and repetitive

tasks throughout the digital thread. The benefits of automation include:

Improving data quality by eliminating human error

Reducing costs by becoming highly efficient and increasing transaction speed

Audit traceability by cataloging logistics workflow and bot execution

Improving compliance using shared enterprise bot libraries

Scalability to create a bot and use it across the enterprise

Ultimately, automation can be used for a variety of purposes to help reduce the OODA

(Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) loop cycle and accelerate the organization strategically. Whether

it is workflow management, scheduling tasks, user prompts, or even something like a hotkey set

up, it helps increase efficiency. It is important to take care when implementing automated

processes as well as to conduct routine checks of the outputs. While automation can serve to

be an effective transformational technology, there is a maturity curve that needs to be realized if

the Navy is going to achieve the desired digital twin.



Figure 7. Spectrum of Automation

One of the most promising emerging technologies is blockchain. Blockchain is an algorithmic-

based digital ledger allowing transactions to be recorded chronologically in a decentralized

environment. Using blockchain technologies, an organization can automate the authentication

and validation of data as it moves around, streamlining the process involved in decision-making.

For instance, a radar system on a ship will have the as-designed bill of material (BOM) and the

as-is BOM. The as-designed BOM is the initial engineering documentation while the as-is BOM

is what was assembled. A common issue that occurs is there are multiple as-is BOMs for one

radar system, all of which deviate from the as-designed BOM. A blockchain solution would

automatically enforce version control, reducing errors from potentially outdated schematics or

confusion of which version to use, which becomes particularly advantageous when 3D printing

an exact replica as a replacement part while at-sea. Being able to automatically ensure that the

limited materials used to print the replacement part are not wasted is key.

Ultimately, all these technological advancements help posture the data within the environment

as a piece of the Enterprise Technical Reference Framework (ETRF) enabling the data-as-a-

service model. Being able to extract the data and support these technologies is key to fully

realizing the ETRF. With the API-centric model of integration, being able to enable new

platform-level capabilities across a scalable environment will drive enterprise innovation to truly

realize the digital twin concept on the path to the Digital Navy. Another area where automation

will vastly improve is in data quality. Data that has been automatically scrubbed for validity

checks, following a set of standards, validation rules and specifications, and that can be

confirmed as accurate is superior data. Without validated and accurate data, any analytics done

to the data will only yield results that fail to add value to business decisions. Making high fidelity

business decisions with low fidelity data presents a risk to the organization.



Data Governance Data Governance is a collection of practices and processes which help to ensure the formal

management of data and its assets within an organization. More specifically it deals with

security and privacy, integrity, usability, integration, compliance, availability, roles and

responsibilities, and overall management of the internal and external data flows within an

organization.

Proper management of data governance is concerned with creating, publishing and maintaining

best practices and guidelines into actionable policies. Governance also ensures the definition of

standards, documentation and a common data vocabulary to help create a shared ecosystem.

Data characterizations and authoritative data sources are defined to allow the data to be

auditable, visible, trustworthy and accessible.

Traditionally organizations follow a top-down waterfall approach that often takes a long time and

yields intangible results. Because of this, there are key issues such as:

Siloed adoption of governance from lack of an executive command or Chief Data Officer

o Inconsistent adoption of policies and standards can lead to a breakdown in the

data lifecycle process and low fidelity information.

No internal authoritative data glossary or dictionaries

o Without standardized means of translating and communicating the data,

information sharing becomes extremely disjointed and difficult.

Lack of data stewards

o Without data stewards in place, there is no way to ensure that the data is

correct, that the data lifecycle is being managed correctly or whether it’s

interpreted correctly.

Figure 8 shows an integrated and holistic approach to data governance.



Figure 8. Logistics Data Governance

To implement a successful data governance process that spans across an organization, a

combination of people, process and technology needs to be integrated.

People – A Digital workforce of people needs to take ownership of the data assets within

their organization. Whether data stewards, data owners, or executives, these roles all

need to collaborate to effectively glean the best insight from the data. Some of the roles

within data governance are explained below:

o Data Producer: In the context of a data governance, this role often aligns with an

authoritative data source owner. This role is tasked with creating the and

modifying data that follows standards and policies. This data is often then moved

downstream throughout its lifecycle, but the origin of the data is defined as

authoritative.

o Data Owners: Data owners vary from data producers as they work with data

derived from other sources. They may handle the data, but they do not manage

or modify it.

o Data Consumers: Data consumers utilize and view the data to make informed

decisions. They are presented with the data and then often use tools to display

the data in the form of reports and dashboards which allow them to make

decisions.

Process – Processes need to constantly be updated to adapt to changes in the mission

and exponential technologies. It is imperative to automate and accelerate process

changes and keep up with regulatory and compliance requirements. Data

characterizations, data standards, and data catalogs need to be up to date and shared

across the organization.

Technology – Innovative tools that fit into the ecosystem of people and processes can

help streamline the governance process and lead to making the best business decisions

from data.

Data

Consumers

Utilizes data for

mission

functions

including:

• Reporting • Analytics • Data

Discovery • Metrics

Logistics Data Governance

Data Steward/

Data Architect

Work together

to enable

cohesive,

documented

solutions that

can be

quantifiably

measured and

improved upon

Data Producer

Tasked with

capturing,

creating and

modifying data

within specific

domains, in

accordance

with data

standards and

policies

LOG IT

EXCOMM

Executive body

tasked with

determining

strategic

direction for the

enterprise-wide

governance

and utilization

of information

as an asset

Data Owners

Mission data

business owner

not tasked with

managing or

modifying the

data



Enabling the Enterprise Reference Technical Framework will be possible through the successful

implementation of the aforementioned roles. The LOG IT EXCOMM will provide executive

leadership approval of direction for the data architects and data producers to collaborate on

implementation, while the data owners will support that and assist in ensuring the data users

maintain effectiveness in the data lifecycle.

Digital Data Workforce In a vacuum, data is perfect. But when introduced to users and a multitude of systems and

formats, data can be maligned and experience unnecessary evolution. Throughout the

organization, there are numerous roles that will have responsibility for governing and managing

data. Being able to clearly identify those involved in the data thread will be key to supporting the

capabilities found in the digital future-state. Figure 9 shows the data workforce roles and how

they fit with the overall digital workforce.

Figure 9. Digital Roles for Data Personnel

Figure 10 shows representative descriptions for some of the data roles that are also involved

the data governance process. A complete list of data roles can be found in the Workforce Plan

Appendix.



Figure 10: Examples of Digital Workforce Data Roles

Role Description

Data

Chief Data

Officer (CDO)

Chief Data Officers are responsible for enterprise-wide governance and utilization of information as an asset. They use personas, use cases and data to answer questions that support mission outcomes. In the context of data governance, they define strategies for developing and delivering data-centric proof-of-concepts to support the mission.

Data

Architect

Responsible for the development and implementation of the data architecture in accordance with the Digital Transformation Plan. They fall into data governance by helping architect efforts that can improve how data is utilized.

Data Steward

Manages a complex, interoperable data environment by having mastery of the mission and data governance process. Focuses on operational oversight to maintain the highest levels of data quality, security and audit traceability of the data.

Data Characterization What is data? Data is the representation of facts, concepts, or instructions in a formalized

manner suitable for communication, interpretation, or processing by humans or by automated

means. It is helpful to categorize data to provide context on how the information is represented

and used and for consistency when communicating about the Data Plan.

The characterization of data oftentimes can be broken down into three areas: data models, data

types, and data organization. With the complexity of the Navy’s data universe, all of the models,

types, and organizational structures can be found within the entity.

Data Models

1. Conceptual – Model of data that contains the entity names and the relationships. This is

a very high-level view of the data model.

2. Logical – Model of data that has the entity names, relationships, attributes, primary and

foreign keys to show derived components

3. Physical – Model of data that has more drilled down details such as primary keys,

foreign keys, table names, column names and column data types

4. Analytical – Model of data that utilizes data warehouses or data marts to utilize business

intelligence and AI capabilities to drive decision making

Data Types

Data types refer to the types of information that then may feed into warehouses and

repositories. Examples of data types include referential data (e.g., metadata tagging schema),

master data (e.g., configuration data, algorithm libraries), transactional data such as sensor

data, authoritative data and derived data (e.g., readiness calculations). Derived data can feed

into authoritative data sources to then travel downstream for reports and dashboards.

Data Organization



Data can be organized in numerous ways. Traditionally and in most organizations, users are

familiar with the terms structured, unstructured, and maybe semi-structured data:

Structured data is usually thought of as data that comes from relational databases or

spreadsheets and is organized and clearly defined.

Unstructured data is data that comes in various formats that are not based in traditional

formats. Social media posts, word processing files, video, and digital images are some of the

examples of unstructured data.

Semi-Structured data is data that may not be organized into a repository, but still has

associated information and tags. There is a structure, but they do not have traditional table

format of a database or spreadsheet. JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) and XML (Extensible

Markup Language) are examples of semi-structured data.

Fortunately, in today’s digital environment technologies exist to help minimize what traditionally

has been the over emphasis on keeping track of whether data was unstructured or structured.

These technologies also help an organization focus more on reporting and analytics. For

example, distributed data processing platforms and in-memory compute can ingest data

regardless of how it is organized and can load data from files (e.g., .csv, JSON, XML), from

databases like MySQL and Oracle, and streaming data from IoT devices. Schema-on-read is

another characteristic of processing data in an analytics focused environment. Schema-on-read

automatically processes a diverse set of data types without the need for indexes or other data

constructs. This contrasts with most relational database systems that use a well-defined

schema to write, which is oftentimes called schema-on-write.

Data Standards In an increasingly complex and multi-faceted environment, data standards are the common

tongue that will allow interaction from end-to-end of the digital thread while helping to develop

and maintain a rigor of data quality. Throughout the data lifecycle, there are different needs from

the data which requires a different syntax to operate effectively. As seen in Figure 11, there are

different data standards for each phase of the cycle, providing different capabilities along the

way.



Figure 11. S Series Representation and Overlaps with GEIA and MIL Standards

An increasingly popular across the aerospace and defense community is the open-sourced S-

Series ILS specifications. The purpose of using the S-Series ILS specifications is to obtain a

structured way to handle the operational, supply and maintenance data feedback between

different stakeholders. Stakeholders can be operators, industries (manufacturers or

maintainers), vendors, suppliers, etc. The S-Series covers a wide spectrum of specifications

that adhere to different roles and types of data.

Within the Department of the Navy and military community at large, there are numerous

standards utilized typically identified within a specific handbook (MIL-HDBK), a standard (MIL-

STD), or a publication (DOD/DON-XXXX). Because of the rich history of military acquisition and

information use, there are a variety of legacy standards still in use, while in other areas industry

standards (such as GEIA-0007) have become the document of authority.

The Logistics Data Working Group has identified several data standards that are utilized across

the Navy. This listing will become the data standards framework, which corresponds to specific

standards to phases within the data lifecycle. By establishing the boundaries from which to

operate in, the Logistics Data Working Group will coordinate with DASN ELM in the data policy

refresh process to incorporate the data standards framework as a structure to enable the data

governance process. The full framework can be found in the appendix along with the listing of

the current standards. Additionally, the framework is continually evolving and will be updated

accordingly.



Authoritative Data Sources An authoritative data source is an official and recognized source of data. Data provided from an

authoritative data source is considered “true” in instances of variation between the source and

alternative data repositories. This data passes through data quality checks and adheres to data

standards to support readiness and logistics decisions. An authoritative data source can be

derived data. For example, readiness calculations are the result of (i.e., derived from) multiple

raw data sources. Identifying the authoritative data sources across a large organization like

Navy Logistics IT is a time consuming and complex process. The Data Plan will be updated in

the future when this process is identified.



Appendix

Implementation Guidance Figure 12 shows the actions that can be taken now and, in the future, to make the Data Plan

actionable. As the Data Plan is updated, the LOG IT Digital Transformation SharePoint site will

contain the current version of the roadmap.

Figure 12. Logistics IT Data Roadmap

References 1. Department of the Navy Enterprise Data Strategy 2023, 26 April 2018

2. Department of the Navy Strategy for Data and Analytics Optimization, 15 September

2017

3. DoD Instruction 8320.02, “Sharing Data, Information, and IT Services in the DoD”, 5

August 2013

4. DoD Instruction 8320.07, “Implementing the Sharing of Data, Information and IT

Services in the DoD”, 5 December 2017

5. Defense Information Systems Agency’s Joint Information Environment, 5 May 2014

6. Intelligence Community Information Technology Enterprise (IC ITE) Strategy 2016-2020



Logistics Data Working Group Participants The following is a list of the organizations that participate in the Logistics Data Working Group:

CNIC NAVSUP BSC

NAVAIR NAVSUP N3

NAVAIR 6.7 NAVSUP N6

NAVAIR 6.8 NAVSUP WSS

NAVFAC OPNAV N12

NAVSEA OPNAV N41

NAVSEA 00I SPAWAR

NAVSEA 04 SPAWAR PEO C4I

NAVSEA 05 SSP

NAVSEA 06 USFF N41

NAVSEA 07 USFF N43



Data Standards There are a number of standards used both within the government and in private industry that

can facilitate the interoperability of data through the enterprise.

Figure 13. Product Data Related Standards

The LDWG will review standards, including the following, for potential adoption:

Figure 14. Example Data Standards

Contract DIDs (ASSIST) ISO 10303 Part 242 ed1&2

MIL-STD 1629 S1000D

EN9300 120ed2 ISO 14306 JT V1&V2 MIL-STD 2155 S2000M

FMI/FMU ISO 9000 MIL-STD 31000 S3000L

IEEE MARTE MoSSEC S4000P

ISA-95 (MES) MIL-HDBK 217 NAVAIR 00-25-403 S5000F

ISO 10303 Part 209 MIL-HDBK 338 OAGIS 10 (ERP) SAE-GEIA-STD 0007

ISO 10303 Part 210 MIL-HDBK 472 OSLC SEA-EIA 649-B

ISO 10303 Part 233 MIL-HDBK 2155 PRC/U3D SX000i

ISO 10303 Part 238 MIL-PRF 49506 QIF SysML

ISO 10303 Part 239 MIL-STD 1390 ReqIF VDA 4968 VEC



(PLCS) KBL

Data Digital Workforce Crosswalk Figure 16 shows a mapping between the current and digital job descriptions.

Figure 15: Digital Data Roles

Jobs As-Is Job Description To- Be Jobs Description

Data

Chief Data

Officer (CDO)

Currently does not exist

within the Navy

Chief Data officers (or Chief Digital officers) are

responsible for enterprise-wide governance and

utilization of information as an asset, via data

processing, analysis, data mining, and information

trading. Drive growth by converting traditional "analog"

businesses to digital ones, and oversee operations in

the rapidly changing digital sectors (i.e. mobile

applications);

Data Scientist Data scientists drive initiatives to improve end user

experience, while delivering analytics to better

understand user engagement.

Data

Architect

Responsible for the organization’s data architecture

and creation of business cases for development of

data architecture and lifecycle strategies, engineering

solutions, implementation plans and estimates.

Data Steward

Current PEO/PMW

echelon

The data steward knows how the data is collected,

maintained, and interpreted in and out. The job

revolves around, but is not limited to, identifying the

importance of data, determining how long to keep

records of the data and metrics around quality

improvement of data analysis.

Data

Engineers

Operates at the Echelon

2/3/4 level

Develops and maintain integration components, while

also creating and refreshing data cubes. Great

knowledge and depth about both standard relational

databases and “Big Data” platforms; in addition,

develops data strategies, policies, and governance

Reporting

and

Visualization

Developer

Skilled at both creating standard and ad-hoc reports in

addition to presenting insights in a visually compelling

way.

Data Modeler

Develop application data models to meet reporting

and analytics requirements, map application data

models to data lake and/or other source database

data models (e.g. data marts), design business

relationships required at the application data layer,

and use business data definitions in developing

application data models

Data Analysts Operates at the Echelon 3+ Aligned with the business, has a solid understanding



level of end-to-end business processes and associated

value drivers, interprets and translates insights, and

owns the analytics value proposition. Includes product

data analysts supporting Product Lifecycle

Management.


1 DRAFT / PRE-DECISIONAL


Workforce Plan Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Fleet Readiness & Logistics,


Manager (LOGFAM)

5/29/2018



Table of Contents List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ 3


Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 5

Background ............................................................................................................................ 5

Scope ..................................................................................................................................... 5

Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 6

Principles ................................................................................................................................ 6

Change Commitment Curve ................................................................................................ 6

Change Networks ................................................................................................................... 8

Assessment ............................................................................................................................ 9

Approach ............................................................................................................................ 9

Findings and Impacts ............................................................................................................10

Recommendations.................................................................................................................11

Future State and Roadmap .......................................................................................................12

Program Managers to Product Managers ..............................................................................13

Cultural Transformation .........................................................................................................14

Workforce Architecture ..........................................................................................................15

Enabling the Workforce for Digital .........................................................................................16

Implementation Guidance .........................................................................................................17

Program Office Transformation..............................................................................................17

Training Plan .........................................................................................................................19

Program Integration ...............................................................................................................20



List of Figures FIGURE 1. CURRENT AND FUTURE STATE OF THE NAVY LOGISTICS IT WORKFORCE ......................................................................... 4 FIGURE 2. KEY COMPONENTS OF CHANGE MANAGEMENT .......................................................................................................... 6 FIGURE 3. CHANGE COMMITMENT CURVE............................................................................................................................... 7 FIGURE 4. CHANGE COMMITMENT LEVELS .............................................................................................................................. 7 FIGURE 5. STAKEHOLDER CATEGORIES .................................................................................................................................... 7 FIGURE 6. CHANGE NETWORK EXAMPLE ................................................................................................................................. 9 FIGURE 7. CHANGE MANAGEMENT FINDINGS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS - FEBRUARY 2018 ..................................... 10 FIGURE 8. PROGRAM OFFICES: THE INTERSECTION OF STRATEGY AND EXECUTION ........................................................................ 13 FIGURE 9. WORKFORCE ARCHITECTURE ................................................................................................................................ 15 FIGURE 10. DIGITAL ROLE PROFILE TEMPLATE ....................................................................................................................... 16 FIGURE 11. PROGRAM OFFICE DESIGN COMPONENTS ............................................................................................................ 17 FIGURE 12. PROPOSED PROGRAM OFFICE SKILLS .................................................................................................................... 18 FIGURE 13. CONCEPTUAL SKILLS FULFILLMENT MODEL ............................................................................................................ 19 FIGURE 14. WORKFORCE TRAINING PHASES .......................................................................................................................... 19



Executive Summary Multiple external and internal imperatives are pushing Navy Logistics IT to rapidly adopt

advanced technology trends and make significant leaps towards becoming digitally mature.

Moving towards digital is no longer an option, but a necessity, and the LOG FAM needs to take

decisive and transformative steps to ensure its workforce is ready to enable and sustain this

change. This Workforce Plan provides an approach to guide the transformation of the

workforce and the work culture to support the future vision of a digital Navy.

Re-skilling the workforce must happen within a broader framework of managing this enterprise-

wide change. Technological transformation cannot be successful in isolation, so there are

several areas that need to work in tandem for a holistic journey towards digital. The Digital

Transformation Team (DTT) has identified five areas, or workstreams, requiring change to

enable the overall digital transformation – Logistics Services, Data, Technology, Security and

Change Management. Equipping the workforce with relevant skills and experience in all those

areas is a pre-requisite for triggering the transformation.

This Plan begins with an introduction to an industry standard approach using change

management principles to build the workforce needed to mobilize and sustain change. As part

of the DTT effort, an assessment of the current state of the workforce was conducted, and the

findings are presented in this Plan. Table 1 describes the current state at a high level, as well

as a description of the future state of the workforce needed to achieve transformation.

Figure 1. Current and Future State of the Navy Logistics IT Workforce

Current State Future State

People resist change People champion change

Workforce lacks necessary skills Workforce equipped to drive transformation

Reactive and inadequate training Skills forecasting and proactive training

Change management nonexistent Change management standard best practice

Collaboration is stunted Collaboration is enabled

To achieve the desired future state, this Plan presents several recommendations, along with a

roadmap to that future state, and guidance to implement those recommendations. As part of

this roadmap, this Plan emphasizes the need to reset the work culture that motivates formal

collaboration across disciplines and organizations. Specifically, this shift will largely take place

at the Program Office level, as they are the intermediary between strategy and execution.

This Plan provides a holistic view of the workforce roles, skills and responsibilities to support a

digital transformation across Echelons and workstreams (services, data, technology, etc.).

While the immediate intent is not to hire on an entirely new workforce, rather, the approach

entails evolving existing positions, where possible, by aggressively pursuing trainings and skill-

building methods.

This Plan is dependent on a joint effort across stakeholders from OPNAV N4, SYSCOMs,

USFF, and Logistics IT Program offices. This Plan is intended for those stakeholders to

implement to realize a workforce that’s ready, willing, and equipped to meet the transformation

needs of Navy Logistics IT.



Introduction

Background

“We have a people problem, not a technology problem”

An oft-repeated saying within Navy Logistics IT when confronted with the challenge of

technological advancement. Digital implementation will fail if it is not fully embraced by an

adequately bought-in and prepared workforce. Further, the greater the technological shift from

the status quo, the more important—albeit more difficult—workforce buy-in becomes.

The CNO’s “Design for Maintaining Maritime Superiority,” lays the framework for new initiatives

with the ultimate desired outcome of “a Naval Force that produces leaders and teams who learn

and adapt to achieve maximum possible performance…” The Design identifies Four Lines of

Effort to be undertaken to achieve that desired outcome:

1. Strengthen Naval Power at and From Sea

2. Achieve High Velocity Learning at Every Level

3. Strengthen Our Navy Team for the Future

4. Expand and Strengthen Our Network of Partners

This Design is closely in line with, and supported by, the imperatives and steps laid out by the

Workforce Plan. To support High Velocity Learning, workforce infrastructure and capabilities to

grow employee skillsets with digital solutions must keep up with the rate at which those new

technologies are implemented. As workforce buy-in and training lag further and further behind,

technology continues to advance. The gap between technology used at home and technology

used at work grows and ultimately, the Navy faces an increasingly dissatisfied workforce and

risk of continued ineffective readiness.

Strengthening the Navy Team is at the very core of this Workforce Plan, in that it prescribes a

greater focus to enabling the people who are at the core of Navy Logistics IT operations and

mission readiness. Much like the CNO Design, new emphasis on tailored learning, leveraging

information technology to enhance personnel systems, and leadership development are all

important components of building a mission-ready workforce.

Improved collaboration both within and across stakeholder groups, particularly at the Program

Office level, is critical to the success of the transformation effort. To provide the foundation for

Strengthening Network of Partners externally, internal networks within Navy IT must move away

from being siloed, disjointed, and disparate to open, communicative, and synergetic.

The application of organizational change management principles, while previously not

incorporated in transformational efforts within Navy Logistics IT, can guide and ultimately ensure

the success of, workforce commitment to change. Workforce improvement, support, and

planning needs to become just as high of a priority as the technological move to digital.

Scope Organizational change management has several key components. See Table 2 for the

components and a description of each. For the purposes of guiding the workforce



transformation, this Plan provides a high-level sample approach for each of the components.

Together, each component plays a vital role in ensuring success of the transformation effort. A

strong change plan is crucial to keeping the change on track, and should incorporate a strategic

approach to aligning leadership to the change to get top-down stakeholder buy-in. The Plan

should also include communications, workforce management, and training plans, as well

metrics to track progress throughout the entire process.

Figure 2. Key Components of Change Management

Key Components Description

Planning the change Integrated change plan across all projects to manage consistency.

Leadership Alignment Helping leaders understand impacts to their organizations as available and mobilizing them to drive adoption to shared services and new operations.

Communications Building awareness and understanding of what, why, when, how the changes will unfold with controlled timing and consistency.

Workforce Management Defining and executing the plans to manage, track, and forecast the workforce skillset.

Training Developing a training plan to educate employees about their roles in the new operating environment and how to execute work the new way.

Change Measurement The result of the change management activities and the progress in preparing employees for cultural changes; the ongoing tracking of operational readiness and workforce engagement.

Objectives Provide a Workforce Plan to Navy Logistics IT that is based on fundamental best practice

workforce planning and organizational change management principles that will support and

enable the tremendous shift to digital.

Principles While workforce transformation is crucial to the success of the overall Navy Logistics IT digital

transformation, the organizational change management principles on which this Plan is based

are largely unfamiliar to the organization and have been previously utilized minimally or not at

all. To fully grasp this Plan, the organization must first understand the following principles:

• The Change Commitment Curve is the industry framework for measuring change

commitment of stakeholders;

• Change networks are an industry endorsed method of promoting and improving

commitment to change within the organization.

Change Commitment Curve The Change Commitment Curve shows stakeholder commitment over time. It is used to mark

commitment levels of stakeholder groups to better engage them throughout the change journey

(Accenture: Stakeholder Management). The Change Commitment Curve shows the passage of

time on its x-axis and the level of stakeholder commitment on its y-axis. The level of

stakeholder commitment is most often described in four levels: acceptance, understanding,



acceptance and commitment. See Figure 1 for an example Change Commitment Curve and

Table XX for a description of each level of commitment.

Figure 3. Change Commitment Curve

Figure 4. Change Commitment Levels

Level Description

Awareness • High-level awareness of the change journey’s content and context

Understanding • Grasps the nature of the change and how it will impact him/her

Acceptance (or Buy-In)

• Tests new concepts and change implications

• Articulates willingness to perform as the change requires

Commitment • Articulates the change as an accepted norm

• Articulates personal ownership and endorsement of the change

Stakeholders can be categorized in one of eight primary categories. Table 4 below provides

descriptions for, and examples of, the stakeholder categories.

Figure 5. Stakeholder Categories

Stakeholder Category Example Group(s)

A – Sponsors Supporters of the Digital Transformation. Provides vision and leadership to influence implementation success.

• OPNAV N4

• Key individual Executive sponsors

• Significant project Stakeholders

•

B –Program Leadership • SYSCOMs, FLEET



Group includes leadership teams that influence the direction and strategy of the program and in a position to make and/or influence decisions which will impact the success of the project.

• Work stream leadership

• Initiative leads

C –Change Network Group includes leaders across affected organizations in a position to support and advocate change

• IT Program Offices

• Change Leaders/Change Champions

D – Project Team Includes team members that are executing change through the workstreams and initiatives

• Execution team members

• Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)

All categories of stakeholders are eventually impacted by the change. To prevent the

organization from reverting back to its previous state, and to consider the transformation a

success, stakeholder groups need to move up the Curve towards Acceptance and Commitment.

The Change Commitment Curve also illustrates the different rates at which stakeholder groups

will move up the change curve – while Sponsors and Program Leadership should be the first to

commit to the change, the Change Network should follow those groups, the Project Team and

management should follow the Change Network, and so on.

Change Networks To drive change throughout the organizations impacted directly, indirectly, and beyond, formal

Change Networks will need to be established, utilized, and maintained consistently.

Change Networks are defined as a community of employees and leaders who work with

Program leadership to exchange information and support employees throughout the change

journey. The purpose of the Change Network is to raise awareness of and support change

objectives, by championing the vision, encouraging engagement and providing business

support. Change Networks have already begun to take shape within Navy Logistics IT in the

form of regular working groups and other collaboration sessions that include stakeholders from

varying categories and levels. However, additional formal networks that are in regular contact

need to be stood up and maintained throughout the change process.

Key aspects of the Change Network are the Change Champions. Change Champions are at

the center of activities intended to engage and prepare the workforce for new ways to work.

Champions should include representation from all impacted groups and personas. Resistance

is most likely at the “Understanding” stage of commitment, but Change Champions will have the

credibility, expertise, and influence to communicate benefits and persuade resistors to embrace

the change, ultimately helping to foster commitment. Change Networks will continue supporting

the change throughout the process, ultimately providing a sound foundation for the change

journey (Enabling a Change Network). Figure 2 provides an example of a Change Network that

includes Change Champions.



Figure 6. Change Network Example

Assessment

Approach The Digital Transformation Team (DTT) has, and continues to, conduct quantitative and

qualitative analyses of the current workforce as it relates to understanding and committing to

change. The following approach was undertaken:

• LOG IT POM-20 Assessment

o Quantitative and qualitative survey questions on technology, communications,

workforce management and policy, and training

o Respondents:

▪ Nearly half of respondents self-identified as a Program Manager

▪ Nearly 80% of respondents from the GS-14 and GS-15 levels

• Interviews and deep dive sessions with Program Office stakeholders spanning the LOG

FAM Portfolio

• Digital Transformation Workshops

o Cross-Transformation Vector and DTT collaboration sessions held in-person,

spanning several days with the intent of coordinating and further understanding

objectives and efforts undertaken in the move towards digital within LOG FAM

• LOG IT Transformation Sync

o Ongoing bi-weekly sync that serves as primary coordination point for Program

Managers of transformation vectors, CIOs, and DTT

The information gathered during the assessment will serve to guide the recommendations for

workforce transformation.



Figure 7. Change Management Findings, Implications, and Recommendations - February 2018

Findings and Impacts The findings from the assessment conducted by the DTT not only provide insight into the

current state of the workforce from a technology, communications, workforce management, and

training perspective, but also have important implications for the future state of Navy Logistics

IT. Should the workforce continue its current trajectory, it will be unable to fully support a digital

transformation. Further details on the findings and implications specific to each area follow and

can be found summarized in Figure 3.

TECHNOLOGY:

The current use and availability of modern, up-to-date technology within Navy Logistics IT is

well behind that of personal and commercial use. New technology implementations are slow

and difficult, further widening the gap between commercially available IT and what is currently

utilized.

The CNO Design recognizes that, “…as technology is introduced at an accelerating rate, it is being adopted by society just as fast – people are using these new tools as quickly as they are introduced, and in new and novel ways.” If Navy Logistics IT is unable to keep up with modern technological advancements, the current workforce will also fall increasingly behind in their technical skillset. This will ultimately cause a greater expenditure of resources as LOG FAM will



struggle to close this ever-widening skill gap. Looking forward, as the current workforce begins to retire, LOG FAM will have difficulty staffing up the next generation of tech-savvy personnel (who have grown up with digital technology and look to use it in both their personal and professional lives), when the aim should be to attract the best and brightest. Ultimately, this gap could compromise mission capabilities. COMMUNICATIONS:

While the clear majority of respondents reported that they are aware of technology changes that

occur within their organizations, far fewer feel they are able to articulate the reasons for and

expected outcomes of that change.

Navy Logistics IT stakeholders will be unable and unwilling to buy into to change if they do not

understand why those changes are being implemented and how their day-to-day operations will

be affected. Without synergistic, consistent and well-timed communications, stakeholders and

organizations may end up going in opposite directions, ultimately wasting resources.

WORKFORCE MANAGEMENT & POLICY:

According to approximately half of survey respondents, workforce and talent competencies are

not being inventoried, assessed, tracked or forecasted. Additionally, personal development

plans are not being maintained within their organizations.

If the workforce skills are not tracked and forecasted, the skillset that is already behind industry

standards will fall even further behind what is needed to support a digital transformation. This is

particularly problematic at the management level—if personnel do not understand the required

skillsets, they may not be able to staff those roles correctly. Therefore, despite their evident

dedication to the mission, the workforce will be unable to meet their potential.

TRAINING:

While respondents that report that a wide breadth of trainings are readily available, only slightly

more than half agree that they receive the necessary training, and time to complete said

training, to operate in the new way of working.

If the workforce does not perceive trainings to be readily accessible, personnel will be unable to

remedy skills gaps. While available learning and training opportunities to expand skillsets

outside of their immediate role would improve competency in the workforce, a (perceived or

legitimate) lack of those opportunities will have the opposite effect. If skills gaps persist or

widen, CNO Vision will not be achieved.

Recommendations With the assessment findings, and their implications, determined, the DTT compiled the

recommendations into five high-level recommendations, each further broken down into their

respective components:

1. Activate change networks

a. Identify change network to drive transformation

b. Empower change network via specialized training, roles and teams that own

change and ensuring leadership support to accelerate change

2. Refresh workforce and roles.



a. Define roles fit for a digital Navy: Data Officer, System Security Manager, Service

Owner

b. Analyze skills gap and build curriculum

c. Personalize and prioritize trainings

d. Attract talent with digital mindset

3. Formalize change process

a. Setup and enable dedicated roles to facilitate change; Change Manager at

appropriate echelons and program offices

b. Establish and enforce communications and training standards

c. Require customer-centric mindset for all initiatives

4. Collapse siloes in favor of collaboration

a. Move from organization to mission-focused teams

b. Expand use of collaborative tools

c. Create communities and learning boards

5. Measure and motivate adoption

a. Establish mechanism to quantify change adoption

b. Compare intended results with actual outcomes

c. Recognize and reward meaningful contributions

Future State and Roadmap While buy-in to change by all stakeholder groups is the goal of the workforce transformation, the

largest burden to ensure a successful transformation to a digital Navy Logistics IT will fall on the

shoulders of the Program Managers. The role of Program Managers, and Program Offices, in

their position between strategy and execution, will need to grow and evolve. Cultural

transformation brought on by digital transformation, will impact, and will need to be supported

by, those Program Offices. Updated workforce skills will ensure execution of plans by Program

Offices, and Program Managers will play a role in identifying the necessary skillsets.



Figure 8. Program Offices: The Intersection of Strategy and Execution

Program Managers to Product Managers Program Managers have the difficult—but critical—job of translating prescribed strategies into

execution plans, and then turning those plans into reality. Therefore, Program Managers will

play a crucial role in the success of digital transformation.

To ensure the success of the Program Managers, support across must be provided at all levels.

Workforce culture must shift to increase collaboration across Program Management offices and

workstreams to equip them, and the people they lead, with the right skills. Culture change

should begin from, and be advocated for, the top of the organization. Functional and technical

guidance will come from the workforce at the upper Echelons.

To keep pace, Program Managers must move away from just traditional project management

skills to expertise across all the transformation areas. They must grow the breadth of their

skills, but not in isolation – they will need support from leadership for guidance, coordination,

and ultimately, execution. Ultimately, Program Managers must become Product Managers.

The Product Owner’s primary role is overall accountability for the identification of and,

realization of the committed benefits through maximum value extraction for the business, whilst

providing the best customer and colleague experiences. This means that they must become

multi-disciplinary and take on a “product mindset” (Gartner).



The product mindset is characterized by:

• Having a unified perspective on current and future business capabilities

• Treating the software supporting these capabilities as a product — a suite of

applications, services and processes that define how a specific business function or unit

operates

• Having continuity in the definition and delivery of the software to support these business

capabilities (Gartner).

Cultural Transformation

“Culture eats strategy for breakfast” – Peter Drucker (HBR)

The workforce, despite their passion for the mission, feels ill-equipped and ill-prepared to keep

pace with ever-advancing modern technology and threats. This is a direct consequence of

future workforce skills not being forecasted and a lack of available relevant and up-to-date

training. This feeling of being ill-equipped and ill-prepared causes a cultural stagnation.

Digital transformation disrupts not only the day-to-day work done, but the workforce doing that

work as well. Every workforce has its own unique culture, but without also changing the culture,

digital transformation will ultimately fail.

Ultimately, disruption will impact work culture in the following ways (Workforce of the Future and

Culture):

1. How work is organized – as Program Offices collaborate more, based largely on the

shared services they provide, the workforce will need increased trust and empowerment,

openness to ideas coming from anywhere across Navy Logistics IT, transparent

communication and increased agility and flexibility

2. What work is performed – as systems becomes more automated, employee roles will

begin to require more judgment, creativity and ability to make decisions. Analytics-

based decision making enables experimentation, iteration and adaptation by the

workforce, so data will enable organizations to personalize the employee experience to

individual needs.

3. Who performs the work and the employee experience – as silos collapse within and

across the Program Offices performing Logistics IT work (Program Managers should

become generalists- instead of knowing only about the system they lead, should know a

little bit about each system while leading their team of specialists), collaboration will

need to increase and improve; workers will also develop new skills and capabilities to

keep pace with the Transformation, so learning experiences will need to become more

personalized

4. How work is led and managed – as leaders lead differently to support a workforce that is

more digitally enabled, leaders will need to develop the next generation of leaders by

inspiring, influencing and providing context of the new Digital work to their subordinates.

They will also need to cultivate and role model behaviors for a culture that supports a

digital workforce, by placing new emphasis on innovation, experimentation, and thinking

time.



Workforce Architecture Program Managers play a key role in the implementation of digital solutions, but they are only

one part of the larger workforce that must ultimately transform. Re-tooling of data and

technology also requires re-tooling of the workforce. Utilizing industry standards, along with

understanding of the goal of building a workforce that will support a move to, and sustainment,

of digital, this Workforce Architecture was built.

• Roles are defined by:

o DTT Workstream they most closely correspond to (excluding the PMO and

Architecture roles included)

o Echelon at which they exist

▪ Echelon I at the LOG FAM level: Sponsorship level

▪ Echelon II: Planning and Management level

▪ Echelon III+: Execution level

• Roles are partly defined by workstream but interact with each other horizontally as well

o Cross-workstream roles

Figure 9. Workforce Architecture



Enabling the Workforce for Digital • Defined Digital roles may have cross-over or overlap with existing Navy Logistics IT

roles

o Digital roles may increase scope and responsibility of current roles

o To bring the current workforce up to speed, skillset will need to be fortified with

additional training

• Defined Digital roles may be brand new to Navy Logistics IT

o May require hiring of additional personnel, which in turn may require the creation

of new billets by N1 and/or other organizations responsible for recruitment and

hiring

For each role, a profile is co-created with the relevant working groups and stakeholders. A

template for the role profile is included below.

Figure 10. Digital Role Profile Template

Existing related roles refers to roles that have already been defined by OPM and/or DoD

personnel management, that based on their descriptions, responsibilities and required skills, are

like the new Digital role. The extent to which a “skills gap” exists (that is, the difference between

the skillsets in roles that are currently filled within Navy Logistics IT and the skills required to

perform competently at the new Digital role) will vary. Program Offices will be responsible for



analyzing the roles currently filled within their organization and comparing those with the newly-

defined roles suggested to support the digital transformation.

Roles are foundational and build upon each other—that is, roles to be implemented in Horizon

Two should not be implemented before all Horizon One roles; roles to be implemented in

Horizon Three should not be implemented before all Horizon One and Two roles have been

implemented.

Implementation Guidance Equipping the LOG IT Program Offices with the necessary skills, support and structure is an

urgent next step. It’s a joint responsibility of LOG FAM leaders in Echelon I / II and existing

program offices to setup and operationalize fit for purpose IT organizations.

These organizations can no longer be focused solely on program management and technical

skills or operate in isolation. They must act as Center of Excellences for all the skills and

competencies (functional, technical, data, change, security) necessary for digital transformation,

plus maximize productivity and efficiency by operating as integrated / connected teams focused

on delivering the mission outcomes and logistics services*. For additional details on the mission

outcomes and services, please reference the “Logistics Services Plan”.

Two main areas that influence the design and success of future program offices are the training

plan and the program integration plan, as illustrated in figure 7. The training plan needs to

provide guidance on identifying, developing and applying required skills outlined by the

workforce architecture. The integration plan provides guidance on restructuring the

organizations to formalize integration and collaboration across teams for shared benefits. The

learning and integration plans complement each other as they are both aimed at creating

conditions for program office success.

Figure 11. Program Office Design Components

Program Office Transformation The goal of the IT program offices is to deliver logistics services and capabilities (not just

systems) to end users for enabling the mission. That requires them to understand and apply

skills / methods that go beyond technical and project management competencies. Success of

technology needs to be measured by how much it’s improving user and service performance,

not just system performance. To achieve that, program offices need to excel at a wide variety of

skills and/or formally integrate with stakeholders that can provide guidance necessary for

success. Figure 8 below illustrate the multidisciplinary nature of the work each program office

needs to own. Even though IT execution is often managed by vendors / other LOG IT partners,



program offices need to have a working understanding of these concepts for quality assurance

and driving holistic movement towards digital maturity.

Figure 12. Proposed Program Office Skills

To the extent possible, these competencies should exist within program offices, as they are all

required for ensuring technology is delivering desired capabilities and experiences to end users

in a secured, effective, and accelerated way. Any missing skills will compromise the ability of the

program office to adequately deliver mission or user needs. For example, lack of agile

implementation, will continue to result in multi-year release cycles even if the need for the

desired capability is urgent.

In cases where these skills are not available, program offices need to be supported by partners

to fill any gaps. Further, program offices cannot be expected to operate independently and need

to be provided guidance from their leadership on all these topics. Both reasons require

additional / upgraded roles in Echelon I and Echelon II to provide needed support to the

program office. Hence the proposed workforce architecture is not just focused on program office

roles, but also skills that need to exist in upper echelons to provide needed coaching and

expertise. A common scenario observed is that a Program Offices may have basic program

management and technical skills, but lack functional / change management competencies and

advanced technical and data skills. In such situations, organizations associated with the

program offices need to provide the missing skills. Figure below illustrates an example. For

these partnerships to be effective and predictable, they cannot be reactive. Instead they must

be proactive and formalized through necessary governance and communication channels.



Figure 13. Conceptual Skills Fulfillment Model

Training Plan To help LOG IT move towards a skilled workforce fit for enabling digital transformation, whether

in IT program offices or other IT organizations (e.g. SYSCOM CIO, Fleet etc), a comprehensive

training plan is required. It needs to capture the full learning lifecycle including training needs

assessment, training design, delivery, application & evaluation. These phases as well as

recommended owners are described below for program offices, but the approach can be

replicated for other organization. Some guiding principles to manage and implement the training

plan include:

• Collaboration via training: Use trainings to improve and formalize collaboration.

• Support career path: Trainings should be planned in conjunction with the career path for

different roles. N1 and N4 should collaborate to maximize the use of the trainings to give the

workforce a chance to advance their skills and career simultaneously.

• Ongoing not one-time: Learning is on ongoing process, setup ways to reinforce and apply

concepts that maximize training adoption.

• Proactive vs. reactive: Forecast training needs regularly to stay up-to-date with trends.

• Dynamic vs. static: Training needs to keep up with evolution and maturity of topics

• Focus on training application: Improve ROI on trainings by formalizing and supporting adoption

not just training completions.

Figure 14. Workforce Training Phases

Training Phase Description Example Owners

Assessment • Prepare training catalog (commercial certifications, internal training needs, etc.)

• Identify training needs and priorities per organization

• Identify training participants

• Setup mechanism to forecast skills (based on trends, career path) and manage periodic assessment

N4, Program Offices



Design / Prep • Prepare training curriculum & schedule

• Sponsor & communicate training needs to individuals

• Where applicable, create training content

• Define & setup delivery methods (classroom, online, community of practice)

Program offices, N4/N9, N2/N6

Delivery • Complete trainings

• Monitor participants and completions

• Capture feedback on additional participants & follow-on trainings

Program office, N4

Application • Identify SMEs / coaches to apply trainings

• Update roles & responsibilities to formalize training use

• Setup networks to reinforce trainings (e.g. Center of Excellence, Community of Practice)

N4, SYSCOMS, Fleet, Program Offices

Evaluation • Identify & capture metrics to track training effectiveness

• Monitor alignment with mission needs

• Establish feedback loop to training assessment

N4, program offices

Program Integration Multiple factors make it necessary to change the way the program offices are organized and

become more integrated. None of the vectors can independently enable to digital transformation

vision and all the program offices stand to benefit from increased collaboration.

• The Logistics Services Plan makes the case for program offices to be reorganized and

structured around service domains to reduce duplication of capabilities, improve logistics

efficiency and provide a standard user experience. For example, integrate NOME,

NAMS, NMMES and NMMES-TR to collectively manage all the maintenance needs or

integrate the PLM program to provide a standard and comprehensive set of PLM

services.

• The Technology Plan makes the case for establishing an enterprise platform to provide

shared services (infrastructure, data) available for all to use and expand to avoid paying

for the same capability multiple times and improve technology standards.

• The Data Plan makes the case for consolidating authoritative data sources to make data

trustworthy and accessible.

• The move towards becoming digital requires unprecedented amount of collaboration

across program offices to accelerate capability deployment and handle unavoidable

interdependencies. Program office themselves have expressed an interest for increased

collaboration to ensure unity of effort.

Several options exist to increase and formalize integration, but a focused discussion needs to

happen across all the key program and N$ to understand the viability and implications of various

scenarios. Options presented below provide a starting point for having the hard but necessary

discussion around integration. These options are not mutually exclusive and can be combined

to derive a hybrid integration approach.



Option 1: One master program office, providing guidance and oversight to smaller program

offices.

Option 2: Program offices organized around logistic service domains (e.g. supply / maintenance

or aviation / maritime)

Option 3: Program offices maintain their structure but are governed and guided by formal

communication channels, such as working groups and center of excellences, for major

workstreams (e.g. Services, Technology, Data, etc.)

Pros and cons for each option need to be established and new options could be discovered

during the discussion to start operationalizing the integration. The urgency demands the

integration to be prompt if not perfect, and it is likely to evolve and get more mature along the

way towards digital transformation.

navsea 06l navy model-based product support (mbps) project ... · enforced system and data...

Documents