8 Comments
User's avatar
Ahmed’s Stack of Subs's avatar

“focus on capabilities, not programs or platforms”

that’ll be the fight…

Eddies26's avatar

Show me a single PAE that is actually doing anything remotely like this. The creep back towards JCIDs is turning into a march for some.

Pete Modigliani's avatar

The PAEs are only a few months into their new role amid many transformations across the Department in personnel, acquisition, requirements, and more. We laid out a vision of where they need to go. Agree on the Services not making progress on the post-JCIDS requirements systems.

Eddies26's avatar

The guidance came out 18 months ago, and most of them have been re-orging for at least a year. Too slow.

Pete Modigliani's avatar

Agreed. The EO came out ~18 months ago, the SECWAR rollout of ATS was in Nov, and the Services phased their rollout of PAEs (except the Army which jumped to new model immediately). Will take time to shape culture, processes, personnel, contracts, and more. I share your frustration to go faster.

Cavcdr66's avatar

So we are still going to buy the wrong stuff — but we’re gonna do it faster. Got it. At its best, this is the outcome….

Pete Modigliani's avatar

The cynicism is strong this morning. Have faith. The slow legacy model won't work in the current environment. Rapidly prototyping and experimenting to explore novel solutions, then scale what works. Better than spending 10+ years defining requirements, securing budgets, developing a mountain of documents, going to 100+ reviews, a year long source selection, and awarding a standard contract to a standard company and wonder why a decade later the users aren't happy.

Cavcdr66's avatar

Being one of the few who have actually worked in Requirements, and S&T, and as an “Acquisition Professional” we can actually generate formation/organization AND platform/system Requirements in less time (perhaps as fast as two years service to platform) IF we would fully resource the effort SEPARATE from Acquisition.