Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dair.nps.edu/handle/123456789/4185
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWilliam Baker-
dc.contributor.authorKaitlynn Castelle-
dc.contributor.authorJoseph Bradley-
dc.contributor.authorLucas Marino-
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-02T18:25:16Z-
dc.date.available2020-12-02T18:25:16Z-
dc.date.issued2020-03-30-
dc.identifier.citationPublished--Unlimited Distributionen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://dair.nps.edu/handle/123456789/4185-
dc.descriptionAcquisition Management / Defense Acquisition Community Contributoren_US
dc.description.abstractDuring acquisition for a sustainment-dominated, major capital asset, decision-making and action to develop the sustainment system must begin early in the acquisition process to sufficiently align the necessary integrated logistics support demanded by these systems. Effective governance improves the likelihood of success for delivery of the asset and accompanying sustainment system to ensure the asset meets expected performance and remains functional over its planned decades-long service life. The service life of a Navy vessel can range from 25 to 50 years. In this case study, we examine the operation of the governance system for major maritime acquisitions, wherein a fleet of multi-billion-dollar capital assets are acquired and sustained. In acquisition of sustainment-dominated systems, an effective governance structure is imperative for providing necessary policy, leadership, resources, and management. In a recursive organizational structure, each viable system contains, and must be contained within, a viable system. This theorem implies that integration and alignment at the next level of recursion is also needed, as well as influence when beneficial to maintaining viability of the total system. Sustainment systems for defense assets of similar financial caliber historically are troubled over their life cycle as programs compete with others to proactively plan for adequate product support. Organizations are challenged to invest in future sustainment, while limited resources are allocated to acquiring new capabilities and maintaining current capabilities (assets). All nine meta-functions described in the Complex System Governance Reference Model have been exercised in a new sustainment system and provide a framework for beneficially influencing program outcomes. This work-in-progress uncovers features of the CSG Reference Model as they continue to influence program decision and action over time. We report on the efforts to use agile development to develop a pilot sustainment system to provide integrated logistics support to the future fleet. This paper explores a model for necessary governance to develop and maintain governance as an organizational capability to sustain high-value capital assets.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipAcquisition Research Programen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherAcquisition Research Programen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesGovernance Engineering;SYM-AM-20-048-
dc.subjectDesign for Sustainmenten_US
dc.subjectGovernance Engineeringen_US
dc.subjectAcquisition Programsen_US
dc.titleDesign for Sustainment: Governance Engineering in Major Acquisition Programsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Appears in Collections:Annual Acquisition Research Symposium Proceedings & Presentations

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
SYM-AM-20-048.pdf605.27 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.