Marine  Magnet Dispatch Service Centre
  • Drone Fleet Readiness Office
  • Status Updates
  • Marine Corps Integration
  • Submit Comments
  • Download Reports
  • Building Drone Swarms

Top 10 Product Support Logistics Services Provided Prove High Sustainment Phase Readiness Result Fiscal Benefits

11/20/2017

2 Comments

 
Readiness is contingent upon having spare parts and trained aviation maintenance Marines to fix our aircraft. Our focus is on if have the right people with the right leadership and skill sets in positions of authority and responsibility. We are a very young force operating on the most technologically advanced aircraft in the world.

Challenges to achieving solid sustainment results include resource constraints, competing priorities and disagreement on how to best incorporate Site Visit Executive guidance into Training Doctrine so Skilled Troop Groups can be best utilised. We have a high turnover rate; essentially, we have an entirely new maintenance department in every squadron every four years.

Competing Priorities contribute to Sustainment goals not being reached in part because long-term planning is sacrificed for short-term performance expectation to include problems in continuity of Team expertise. For our Marines to remain competitive for promotion within their specific pipelines they are required to move and perform different jobs outside their primary MOS. In specific aviation communities, this created an “experience gap” at some of our supervisor levels because we failed to track and prioritise critical skills essential for weapons system sustainment supervisors; we are doing that now.

The hardest hit Group within Naval Aviation is the Strike Fighter community. To take action on immediate readiness issues such as low manning, long-term down aircraft, parts shortages and lack of facilities, we established "Rhino Readiness Recovery" team to identify and address long- term impacts caused by a lack of consistent readiness resourcing.

The team is a combination of subject matter experts from across the Navy and our industry partners who are tasked with solving systemic supply, maintenance, manning and facilities shortfalls that resulted from years of over-utilisation and underfunding.

Naval Aviation utilises a “tiered readiness” construct to ensure our resources are focused on deployed and soon to deploy squadrons. When a squadron returns from deployment, we are forced to take many of their aircraft, parts, and people and give them to the next squadrons preparing for work-ups and deployment.

To put this in perspective, in order to properly man the required Carrier Air Wings either on deployment or preparing to deploy at mandated levels, we do not have enough Sailors left to fill the two remaining Air Wings in their maintenance phases.

Due to these shortfalls, we have some squadrons only able to operate a single shift of maintenance when they should be able to run two. We’ve been forced to take risks in maintenance and production and, as a result, our ability to fix and produce up aircraft and therefore train aviators has been compromised.

Despite our best efforts to improve field-level aircraft sustain workload forecasts, we are not sure about how future maintenance & modification workloads may grow. The size of workload or category uncertainly of aircraft sustain grows with projection beyond ages at which military has typically operated aircraft no doubt part of deficits we have cited in established forecasting models. We have identified multiple factors such as new materiel consumption processes and operational functions influence on workload growth likely to emerge as aircraft fleets continue to be pushed past expected service life.

There is little doubt that the F-35 brings unique capabilities to the U.S. military, but without revising sustainment plans to include the key requirements and decision points needed to fully implement the F-35 sustainment strategy, and without aligned funding plans to meet those requirements, DoD is at risk of being unable to leverage the capabilities of the aircraft it has recently purchased. Furthermore, until it improves its plans, DoD faces a larger uncertainty as to whether it can successfully sustain a rapidly expanding fleet.

Site Visit Executive provides logistics, engineering and maintenance assistance to weapons systems operators and sustainers to resolve availability and supportability issues, to assist in making logistics and system metrics available, and in troubleshooting and for training especially during introduction of new or newly modified systems.

Modernisation to include creation of prototype and subsequent implementation to include battery of flight tests. Machine will have latest technical solutions taking into account use in combat operations. New machine will be able to provide flights under conditions of fire/info counteraction of hostile forces. The machine is equipped with modern integrated complex of on-board radio electronic equipment to provide 24/7 automatic flight pilot manoeuvre The air defence system offers protection against missile damage with radio and optical/electronic guidance.

Site Visit Executive supports the operation of large numbers of technology-based systems enabling technicians to perform electronic, electromechanical, mechanical maintenance, and communications support on deployed technologies in difficult-to-support forward deployed field-level expeditions.

Marine Corps "Ship-to-Shore" Product Support Logistics Connections technology advances include Smart Sensors for capturing logistics information as materiel moves through the supply system to inform critical decision-making processes.

New techniques application to Process capability include automated receipt, issue, inventory, underway replenishment & vehicle tracking. These features enable Distance Support, the transit of workload from units afloat to organisations ashore outside the theater with commensurate benefit to mission goals.

Moving logistics information to end users, e.g. Joint sea base is a significant step in achieving Total Asset Visibility, In Transit Visibility, Joint inter-operations & Common Operating Picture. Additional benefits include utilisation of multiple cross platform integrators.

Site Visit Executive maintains a professional logistics staff experienced in support of mission critical defense systems possessing diverse mix of military and industrial experience and is capable of providing a full range of equipment sustainment activities.

Site Visit Executive conducts Logistics Support Training Reviews throughout the acquisition process through the selective application of scientific and engineering principles to assist with the Integrated Logistics Support activities of supply; support equipment condition assessments; training and training equipment; facilities; design interface; maintenance planning; manpower and personnel; technical info, packaging, handling, storage and transit

In a recent system upgrade, Site Visit executive tasked staff with executing systems logistics requirements, led the effort to prepare system operations and maintenance [O&M] status updated, and supported the preparation and conduct of training courses for O&M of subsystem deliverables and their interfaces into the system.

Site Visit Executive, in conjunction with subsystem suppliers, created operator and maintenance tasks to identify required support equipment, numbers of spare and repair parts at the Line Replaceable Unit level, consumable and expendable materiel, and O&M procedures.

DoD reactive approaches to planning for and funding the capabilities needed to sustain the F-35 has resulted in significant readiness challenges—including multi-year delays in establishing repair capabilities and spare parts shortages.

DoD did not plan for and fund stocks of materiel requried to repair parts at the depots, incorrectly assuming materiel would be included as part of the contracts for establishing repair capabilities at the military depots.
So DoD has had to fund and negotiate additional contracts for the materiel. Late requirements identification and lack of funding to support repairs for many components is not expected to be delivered to depots until months/years after tech capabilities to conduct repairs have been established.

Site Visit Executive promoted, updated and staffed the general maintenance concept in coordination with the vendors to define recommended support resources in sufficient detail to allow another contractor with comparable skills to assume O&M, support of the system, and sustain the system availability requirements.

Site Visit Executive has significant experience providing O&M support to DoD customers, providing trained and qualified personnel to support maintenance operations that range from normal preventive maintenance through depot-level repair.

DoD is set to focus more on sustainment of equipment, and plans to “double down and put emphasis on sustainment early enough to potentially change how dollars are invested.

DoD has under invested in sustainment. That creates a whole host of problems. “What we don’t want is for Apaches or Black Hawks to turn into bird nests in five years or a paperweight, and the only way that we can fix that is by making sure we’re having good, candid conversations with stakeholders up front.

So you might have plans in the works for 20 Black Hawks, but if you buy 18 then you can buy the sustainment for the next 10-15 years. So we’re trying to have these discussions early. DoD needs to focus on upkeep of existing goods, rather that getting “enamored with chasing the shiny object.

Equipment comes with a long tail of sustainment and training. Site Visit Executive has proposed putting new system in place where we can see the profile of sustainment, which is going to allow us to have the information to show ‘this is what you look like, this is what you bought into, this is the performance level, or this is where you need to contribute more.

Part of that pitch involves arguing that sustainment isn’t just about maintaining what you have, but opening up future opportunities. The argument is such that as those capabilities come online, the better maintained your equipment is, the better chance you have to load new technologies onto an older platform.

What we’re trying to do is make sure you have a sustainment portfolio in place that goes out 10, 15, 20 years, If we can get investing in sustainment right, that is going to take it to the next level.

Site Visit Executive, in coordination with existing product support sustainment contractors, implemented initial fielding plans and verified that the fielding plans, maintenance actions, and support structure aligned with state-of-the-art maintenance techniques.

Contractor is assigned task of integrating sustainment support for the system, including that for the F-35 supply line component factors, depot maintenance, and pilot and maintainer training, as well as providing engineering and technical support. According to programme officials, the establishment of the Hybrid Product Support Integrator is an acknowledgement that DoD needs to take a more significant role in providing sustainment support for the F-35.

Marine Corps has limited visibility into the support that the contractor will provide along with the actual costs for which the services are responsible, until after the contract is signed.  Contract transparency concerns are complicated by the fact that the services are paying into shared pools for F-35 sustainment, and the costs they are being charged for some requirements—such as for spare parts—cannot be directly tracked to an item that the services own or support that is specifically provided to an individual service.

Already the most expensive weapon system in DoD history, these rising costs are particularly concerning because the military services do not fully understand what they are paying for. This puts us in a precarious position as critical trade-offs are considered that might make F-35 sustainment more affordable.

Without improving communication with the services to help them better understand how the sustainment costs they are being charged relate to the capabilities that they receive, the services may not be able to effectively budget for the F-35 over the long term.

DoD plans to enter into multi-year, performance-based contracts with the prime contractor has the potential to produce cost savings and other benefits. However, important lessons are emerging from its pilot agreements with the contractor that are intended to inform the upcoming multi-year contract negotiations. To date, DoD has not achieved the desired aircraft performance under the pilot agreements, but it continues to move quickly toward negotiating longer-term contracts—which are likely to cost tens of billions of dollars—by 2020.

Without examining whether it has the appropriate metrics to incentivise the contractor or a sufficient understanding of the actual costs and technical characteristics of the aircraft before entering into multi-year, performance-based contracts, DoD could find itself overpaying for sustainment support that is not sufficient to meet warfighter requirements.

Site Visit Executive provides logistics support to deployment/sustain phase test ranges critical to mission success and implements industry-standard purchasing programmes and procedures, accountability systems, and supply inventory operations during decision-making planning for deployment/sustain phase Test Ranges.

Current Navy Weapons Systems Sustainment Models usually incorporate scenarios where future supply support allocations tend to be extrapolated from historical mission requirements. These models are not flexible enough to predict upgrade/repair scenarios when there are significant changes to mission requirements e.g., mobilisation.

Maintaining very high readiness during carrier strike group post-deployment sustainment phase actually saves the Navy money later on, the service found, despite fears that budget constraints might hinder the Navy from making the most of that time in a ship’s deployment cycle
.
Under Navy Optimised Fleet Response Plan, a ship undergoes routine maintenance and modernsation, conducts pre-deployment workups, deploys overseas, and then comes home for a “sustainment phase” of as long as a year before heading back to the shipyard for more maintenance. Carrier strike groups in the sustainment phase could be sent back overseas for a full-length deployment in a major contingency, used locally for training, sent to respond.

When Optimised Fleet Response Plan was rolled out and first implemented, Navy officials worried that the sustainment phase wouldn’t be properly funded and noted that the Navy had a poor track record of funding ships post-deployment. Operations and maintenance budget has been a major bill-payer for other needs, and ships just back from deployment could be especially vulnerable to budget cuts, they worried.

Readiness is as good or better than any deployed carrier out there. And the air wing was too. So that actually, when you keep the ship at a high state of readiness, when you come in for the planned incremental availability, you haven’t thrown all these extra jobs into the work package there.

Of course this high level of readiness had an upfront cost. In the long run, spending a little bit of money like this actually saves you money. A lot of times that is not possible with the way the budget works but U.S. Fleet Forces Command prioritised this funding even during a continuing resolution to make sure carrier remained at peak readiness.

Still, aircraft carrier wing readiness is only one piece of the puzzle. The carrier was fully funded, and the air wing Flight Hour Program account was fully funded, but that shortfalls in areas like supplies and logistics led to airplanes that were not properly maintained and therefore could not fly.

So same attention applied to fully funding Logistics Readiness enabler accounts must be future priority for Navy.

Although field-level mission modeling/simulation has been used at military installations for a long time, the emphasis has always been on war-gaming simulation.

Site Visit Executive has illustrated the utility of modeling/simulation for military aviation logistics applications. Recent advances in modeling/simulation technology, especially in detailing supply line route connection quality for critical equipment components, have made simulation implementation easier because decision makers quickly identify scope of the problem, choose appropriate model to be utilised, and execute smart solutions.

Site Visit Executive provides logistics training through mobile training teams and Help Desk support, providing hands-on and remote logistics training by planning workshop demonstration objectives/activities, materials, points of instruction, and providing field training/instruction.

Site Visit Executive has designed “train-the-trainer” sessions to provide operator training in the field so rapid response capability is up to speed with the latest techniques to result in minimum down time and maximum utilisation of equipment.

Commanding officers submit self-critique reports to Site Visit Executive office for review and dissemination – a redacted version of the report is made available to serve as a reminder about the importance of uncovering operational risks and the planning, briefing, executing and debriefing process.

The Troops say that it’s a useful process for them to go through and identify what went wrong and to ask the most important questions of why did this happen.

It’s useful because it provides examples for training on their own equipment, so if one deployed unit had this issue, and then they go over with their teams in training sessions, it's a great tool to highlight potential recurring traps and do we have processes in place so we’re not going to run into this?

1. Support initial fielding of systems operations

2. Provide new equipment and refresher training

3. Implement Logistics coordination with end-use customer

4. Troubleshoot to component level if required

5. Diagnose spare parts system performance

6. Remove, replace and evacuate system components

7. Perform technology upgrades and system modifications

8. Stratify metrics for battle damage assessment/repair

9. Assist equipment end-users in implementation/operation

10. Coordinate with end-use customers on status reporting

2 Comments

Top 50 Supplier Contract Performance Terms Executive Review Results Provides Reliable Product/Service

11/14/2017

2 Comments

 
The complex characteristics and order size of goods and services purchased by DoD has induced Site Visit Executive to link Product Support activities more explicitly to Weapons system supplier goals. For example, contract deals must prioritise goals in terms of explicit targets for improvements in the performance e.g., quality, responsiveness, and flexibility of equipment design/build/supply lines.

Establishing goals allow these organisations to identify/track metrics that measure Product Support performance over time, compare performance with comparable performance in other firms, measure the performance of individuals and teams working on Product Support activities and hold them accountable for this performance.

Commitment to strategic goals helps align all players associated with Product Support activities with the organisation overall performance and helps reduce or eliminate actions counterproductive to these goals.

DoD Industry partners that have implemented Superior Supplier Goals have significantly improved performance. Cash flow, contract terms and conditions, and relief from compliance requirements, either procedurally or with respect to timing, can reduce contractor costs and risk so function as powerful incentives used to motivate contractors to perform at a high level.

DoD and its contractors negotiate these key components of the business arrangement contract by contract. As a result of this decentralised and individualided approach, Site Visit Executive has noticed that DoD often does not take advantage of an extremely important opportunity to motivate industry behaviour.

DoD policy should establish Superior Supplier Programmes to leverage that opportunity through the use of favourable contract terms and conditions and other changes in business process that would be available to Superior Suppliers that have demonstrated exemplary performance, at the business unit or corporate level, in the areas of cost, schedule, performance, quality, and business relations.

As an integral part of such alignment efforts, DoD must establish Site Visit Executive with responsibilities to develop and maintain a strategic Product Support programme with focus and resources to implement a strategic approach day-to-day.

By choosing Site Visit Executive with broad organisational skills and experience instead of an acquisition expert, DoD will have demonstrated the importance of integrating Product Support with core interest of providing field-level Troops with what they need to Fight and Win.

A strategic approach gives more attention to linking and integrating Product Support activities with core concerns and less to planning and sweating over the details of individual transactions with external sources.

New approach Championed by Site Visit Executive aggregates and stratifies purchases to reflect the size, strategic importance, and risks associated with the purchases. Site Visit Executive aims to simplify workforce burdens of less-important, lower-risk, lower-value purchases by automating transactions,or issuing purchasing cards to supply line personnel.

New Site Visit Executive approach increasingly rationalises purchases e.g., consolidation and group category bundling of requirements/contracts and reductions in the number of suppliers so DoD can deal in-depth with a much smaller number of providers, not transaction by transaction. Using fewer suppliers enables enhance training of customised personnel and technology interfaces to maximise communication/coordination between suppliers and DoD.

Site Visit Executive strategic approach requires much more cooperation among functional communities and specialties in DoD and much more knowledge of internal spend as well as the external market and supplier costs and performance. Marketing, production engineering, product design, and logistics, for example, must help traditional purchasing experts align purchases and suppliers with DoD strategic concerns.

Technical specialists on supplier costs, processes, technologies, etc. are also needed to ensure that suppliers are the overall best source and to help suppliers continually improve to meet changes in DoD strategic needs.

Broad Site Visit Executive authorities for Product Support must be linked to Supply Line Activities also rely more heavily on process training teams with full authorise engineering change, formally recognise and plan for the resource requirements of the teams, and judge the job performance in terms of how teams promote the supplier goals at high levels.

This approach requires higher skills in general and higher-level attention to Product Support in the organisation as a whole. Innovative suppliers use training programs to keep Product Support personnel up to speed on best practices at regional or Supply Line locations to manage strategic sources, create simple process for other sources, and provide training to Product Support Shops.

Strategic importance of sourcing activities is inherent in Purchase Supply Line positions. Purchasing activities link to upstream value system, allowing DoD to obtain appropriate inputs from external suppliers. Procurement activities in large part support inbound logistics and are vital to value creation.

Innovations in technology and increased global competition provide opportunities and challenges driving continuous evaluation and modification of sourcing strategies. Disruptions due to supplier glitches have serious consequences for DoD field-level missions and compromise Troop Position Status.

DoD sourcing strategy is characterised by three key interrelated decisions: 1) Criteria for establishing a supplier base; 2) Criteria for selecting supplier subset base to receive order for meeting DoD requirements; 3) Quantity of goods to order from each supplier selected.

To start with, criteria for developing a supplier base are typically based on DoD perception of supplier ability to fulfill the objectives of quality, quantity, delivery and price. While supplier price may be the most important criteria for politicians, other dimensions can also affect overall mission success rates.

Scoring models are generally used to evaluate suppliers for inclusion in the base. Site Visit Executive approach ranks each supplier in terms of objectives and then, based on a relative weighting of each of the objectives, a total score for each potential supplier is derived. Next, by specifying a threshold score, all suppliers who achieve Quality, Tech, Delivery, etc. threshold are included in the base.

From the approved supply base, the specific subset of suppliers which will actually receive an order must be determined. Sometimes all suppliers in the base meet DoD quality, quantity, delivery and price objectives so DoD may elect to prioritise other criteria like robust performance of Reliability, Availability and Maintenance capabilities over entire Service Life of Equipment.

1. Get quality service from your suppliers and ensure productive working relationship by selecting suppliers who offer a quality service and meet your specific needs.

2. Check the service quality of a potential supplier by seeking advice from business that have worked with them in past

3. Choose suppliers who can meet priorities like faster turnaround no point in selecting on grounds of cost if the turnaround requirements cannot be met.

4. Draw up a service level agreement between your business and your supplier.

5. Agree on targets and specify performance standards that help to define and secure your business/supplier relationship to determine the major responsibilities

6. Invest time in building good relationships with your key suppliers to save money or improve the quality of the goods or services you buy

7. Meet your contacts face-to-face and see how their business operates. Understanding how your supplier works to give you a better sense of how it can benefit your business
.
8. Meet the people who'll be involved with your account and make sure they can be easily reached

9. Ask about supplier plans for development or expansion to find out is goods or services provision will be affected

10. Help your suppliers by placing orders in good time, being clear about deadlines and paying on time.

11. Keep an eye open for any opportunities you can pass their way -in a good customer-supplier relationship they'll do the same for you.

12. Make your business important to your suppliers and they will work harder for you. Some to offer better deals if you promise to use them exclusively.

13. Don't ignore opportunities offered elsewhere. Keep your options open by monitoring the deals offered by other suppliers.

14. Consider if contract or service level agreement is necessary to guard against supplier complacency

15. Coordinate your production schedule service/supply provider

16. Discuss ways to reduce overall costs through size or timing of orders/contracts.

17. Consider additional products or services that your supplier could provide.

18. Get updates on strategic changes or new products early on so adapt to meet those changes.

19. Determine how to forecast sales plan so results are shared with your suppliers will allow you to create accurate schedules.

20. Use purchase order system to control and monitor the buying of goods and services from suppliers to facilitate internal financial controls

21. Prevent specification misunderstandings at the supplier end using guide on stock control and inventory

22. Pay bills promptly. Paying late will strain your relationship with the supplier and could lead to less favourable terms in future.

23. Have payment policy that commits your business to paying undisputed bills on time - a copy should be sent to your suppliers.

24. Use technology to improve efficiency

25. Collaborate more closely with your suppliers through sharing plans, forecasts and consumer info

26. Assess real-time information about sales, orders or market trends

27. Forecast and react quickly to changes in demand

28. Improve efficiency - accurate information on stock means you will only order the supplies you need

29. Use planning or forecasting systems - use your inventory records to forecast the market demand for your product.

30. Assess past sales performances and compare the forecasts from different suppliers.

31. Plan and schedule your entire business by connecting your order and purchasing system with that of your suppliers

32. Place and track orders and the supplier will automatically issue an invoice.

33. Make contracts with suppliers that define the service they must provide and the level of service to be delivered and set out responsibilities and priorities.

34. Build obligations into a contract to be used in any contract where business ability to meet its customer requirements is dependent on the supplier

35. Become involved in drawing up the agreement together with the supplier.

36. Highlight the most critical components of the deal so you can apply non-compliance measures

37. Build periodic supplier performance reviews into deal

38. Require different performance criteria if needs of business change.

39. Take into account improvements in technology when reviewing contract

40. Review suppliers performance at regular intervals to help you to assess the business/supplier relationship in the most objective way possible.

41. Use contract to define the terms and level of service you require from your supplier to prevent existing suppliers are prevented becoming complacent

42. Review your own performance-- failing to pay your suppliers on time won't encourage them to keep their standards high.

43. Understand reasons for terminating contract with supplier if they fail to provide you with services or goods that meet your requirements

44. Check contract to see if termination exit terms minimise your payment so not locked in with supplier if quality and effectiveness decreases

45. Make sure existing supplier gives you all the information you need to make the transition to new supplier with different processes or systems

46. Negotiate so that your new supplier takes responsibility for handling the changeover process.

47. Have guidelines in place for dealing with ending supplier contract and help you to avoid losing supplier you may need at a later date.

48. Explain to the supplier rationale for ending the contract so they offer you a better deal

49. See if suppliers can save you disruption by lowering the price or raising the quality of goods or services

50. Seek advice of independent advisors, and always check your decisions against standards for best practice in your field of business.
2 Comments

Top 50 Suitability Factors Impact Contract Availability Requirements in Pursuit of Mission Readiness

11/14/2017

1 Comment

 

We found scenarios where some potential users of the Service Life Readiness Application did not receive information describing intended capabilities of the new tool because tech information about potential for product support utility was not effectively communicated with stakeholders and intended users.

Without effectively communicating critical information to potential users, useful feedback is not likely to be received as tool is designed, and persistent concerns regarding timeliness, usability & redundancy to not be effectively addressed.

Operational tests show that major programmes are often effective when they tested as operationally suitable, but the converse is not true. This correlation by itself does not prove causality, but it reinforces Logistics considerations that attributes of being interoperable, available, maintainable & reliabile are important to achieving mission success.

For example, well-engineered systems that address suitability factors are probably also better positioned to be effective. Also, no matter its features, a weapon system may not serve its function if it is unreliable and unavailable to the warfighter.

Operations & Sustainment [O&S] cost implications in early system requirements and design must be taken into consideration. Many factors correlating with growth of O&S cost estimates i.e., all aspects of daily field level operations such as maintenance & fuel prices are outside of programme administrative control.

While programme bosses cannot control these external factors, impacts on fuel efficiency and maintenance costs e.g., system reliability, ease of maintenance & repair automation are present.

Usually, trade-offs must be addressed very early in system design, so functional teams must factor them in in early stages of programme planning so new affordability process sets goals/caps on service life sustainment costs e.g., at the point of the Materiel Phase Motion Decision points when bigger design changes can be made.

Don’t dismiss trade-offs just because you cannot control the external factors and uncertainties remain. Potential Operations & Support [O&S] Cost Considerations/Examples include:

1. Diagnostic & Prognostics

2. Condition-Based Maintenance

3. Repair capabilities for new materiel

4. Wear & Tear prevention/control

5. Modernisation requirements

6. Commonality/Standardisation

7. Open System Architecture

8. Designing for supportability

9. Reliability & maintainability

10. Materiel Source Shortage


Top 10 Spare Parts Design Features Provide Tech Performance/Support Selection


1. Reliability/maintainability engineering

Ensuring parts selected meet contractual requirements and proper design application is critical to ensuring reliability and maintainability requirements of the weapons systems or equipment acquisition contracts are met. Reliability and maintainability have a direct impact on both mission capability and service life cost. The part selection process will also reduce the use of parts with known built-in failure mechanisms, resulting in enhanced reliability and maintainability.

2. Standardisation

Reducing proliferation of part types used in system designs through standardisation is important for enhancing materiel readiness and interoperability and for reducing total service life costs. Selecting standard or commonly used parts within and across DoD weapons systems ensures reliable part types that reduce design risks are used and enhances inter/intra-departmental part commonality and interchangeability; reduces the variety of parts in the inventory; enhances part availability, reliability, maintainability, and economies of scale; and reduces part termination scenarios.

3. Part and supplier qualify

An important requirement for selecting parts is considering the source of supply and establishing disciplined part selection process in the design phase, as part of formal assessments to increase probability of using best available parts and maintaining a parts baseline to include rational approach to qualify suppliers, change suppliers, and/or switch parts. Must evaluate if path exists for verification testing and qualification articles. Standardisation limits introduction of new parts to enable consistent manufacturing planning and support systems and processes such as materiel requirements planning.

4. Design

Parts teams evaluate the effects of part selection on all applications, considering all requirements to ensure key design considerations are given sufficient emphasis and that processes are in place to avoid misdirected design practices.

5. Cost/funding

Parts teams ensure standardisation is taken into account to minimise costs e.g., maximise the use of parts already being used elsewhere and identifies funding required for perform activities to determine part will work as intended. Reduced acquisition lead-time is key factor when a preferred part is used so DoD and suppliers can frequently avoid the expense and delay of designing new parts, as well as issues associated with acquiring a new item with no available performance demo.

6. Materiel

Parts teams ensure materiel selection process accounts for special issue conditions and prevention deficits in utility also assess selected parts for availability and evaluates parts to mitigate future effects of not being available. Processes are established to minimise the use of suspect components, materials, and processes. Parts teams ensure qualification considerations have been properly addressed by identifying and performing test/assess.

7. Process capability/control

Parts teams ensure strong communication foundation exists in determining consistency of the design to manufacturing processes and mandates processes are sufficient to satisfy the system requirements. Assurance must be made that special design considerations-- for example, the product performance, are sufficient for system requirements.

8. Quality Requirements

Parts teams ensure quality requirements have been established for different types and recommends root cause part failure assessment approaches, identification of failure effects on performance, and corrective action accountability. Proper controls are established to avoid introduction of suspect parts result of schedule and out-of-date conditions. An important factor in selecting quality parts suppliers is whether parts from selected supplier are found quality assured for application of use location. Suppliers must address both quantification of process control and implementation of process controls on manufacturing, materiel, transit, process changes and field-level customer satisfaction.

9. Enhanced logistics readiness/interoperability

When assemblies or systems share common components, repair time is shorter, because parts are more likely to be in the supply line. Using common components simplifies logistics support and enhances ability to function as substitute because fewer parts need to be stocked. Common parts translate to savings in procuring, testing, warehousing, and transit of parts.

10. Increased supportability of systems & equipment.

Preferred parts reduce risk and improve chances equipment will perform reliably. Preferred parts have a history of proven reliability, durability under testing and performance at stated levels. Use of preferred parts can reduce number of part failures, cutting down number of maintenance actions, increasing operational availability, and potentially precluding failures with potential to compromise success of critical missions.


Top 10 Questions Assess Weapons System Capability Requirements for Field-level Performance

All design statements we’re making — ‘I’m going to have depot repair’ or ‘I’m going to have contractor logistics support’ — all decisions have to be tied to a contract deliverable in application status updates so we can assure ourselves that not only are we fully considering it, we’re buying it and we’ll deliver it. It is also essential we’re taking a look at the requirements our capability teams outline for us in terms of performance characteristics:

1. What are our supply availability measures?

2. What is the mean time to repair?

3. How maintainable, reliable, available should the system be?


4. How to link requirements to operational sustainment review?

5. What happens after a weapons system is fielded?

6. Are all integrated product support elements being reviewed?

7. What do Services demand in terms of design work and performance?

8. How did the system perform in tests?

9. Is system proving utility out in operational theatre?

10. What factors are most important for administrative application mechanism?


Top 10 Service Equipment Portfolio Review Build Guidance Validate, Prioritise & Approve Requirements for Tactical Contract Decisions

DoD utilisation of existing contract review boards focused on efforts for assuring proposed contract solicitations are in compliance with existing guidance instead of supporting trade-off decisions in service portfolios or assessing opportunities for efficiencies and eliminating duplicative requirements.

DoD must have more visibility over contracted services and requirements, and to provide opportunities to collect metrics and assess lessons learned and best practices from contracting at individual level command levels and also across military departments to inform programming and budget decisions. DoD must have flexibility to ensure more tactical contracting elements are considered prior to contract award, such as workforce needs and the sufficiency of market research.

DoD has now been provided with flexibility in how they achieve objectives via structured process:

1. Inform, assess, and support trade-off decisions on service requirements cost, schedule, and performance for the acquisition of services

2. Identify opportunities for efficiencies to include realignment of requirements to better align to mission

3. Elimination duplicative capabilities and identify of strategic sourcing capabilities

4. Take broad view so operations are focused on requirements more than contracts

5. Create prioritised list of outcomes for both funded and non-funded existing and anticipated requirements

6. Establish authority of command or organisational unit owning requirements and funding located

7. Validate service requirement before approval of acquisition strategy

8. Allocate sufficient funding to be available for the proposed actions

9. Conduct appropriate acquisition planning and market research

10. Ensure proposed solicitation and proposal evaluation criteria are consistent.


Top 10 Performance Measures of Dispatcher Work Loads Direct Equipment Sales to Potential Customers


1. Total case lines authorised to participate as mechanism to procure services project, transaction or response that is “opened” and “closed” over a period of time to achieve resolution of a problem, claim, request, proposal or other complex activity

2. Total number of open cases impact workflow or business process must take place to move the case to its outcome. Within application, an alerts-style functionality will frequently exist against customer status updates

3. Undelivered value is most probable price that product should bring in competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to sanctioned sale with buyer and seller information brief assuming price is not affected by undue stimulus.

4. Status of anticipated standard/conditional offer sets out terms of sales purchase date and stipulates conditions to be met result in order contract agreement terms

5. Total purchase value of official sales added per unit over all units sold is total value added equivalents impact intermediate consumption.

6. Status of offer receipt is either accepted or countered sometimes, term 'subject to contract' is used in offers or acceptances to indicate that parties intend to be bound only under a formal contract execution.

7. Content Assessment of contract modification for mutually agreed changes or alterations to introduce or cancel specifications or terms of an existing contract, while leaving its overall purpose and effect intact.

8. Lists of secondary conditions send update order for ‘In Progress’ scenario state where processing can be triggered if a revision order does not match specifications provided in the update order.

9. Case closures transfer product balances from status updates to summary account at the end of product supply period.

10. Other case-by-case conditions
1 Comment

Top 10 Questions Building Equipment Readiness Feedback Indicator Assess Upgrade/Repair Metrics

11/6/2017

1 Comment

 
Standing up a new modernisation command for the express purpose of efficiently deploying weapons systems capabilities and capacity requires both Site Visit Executive attention and plenty of input from troops to keep it running. The idea is to keep war fighters closer to the process, while bringing the right experience and perspective to fuse the requirements and acquisitions process.

Information from readiness systems is required to determine number of pieces of equipment available for deployment. No Site Visit Executive has created an easy way to link equipment information available from readiness and Services systems.

Under current administrative structures, Troops, requirement writers for what new equipment must do, the programme offices who actually build things, and the logisticians who keep them running are segregated in different bureaucracies. Processes are staff-centric and often stove-piped, which inhibits integration within and across programmes.

Requirements process is slow and overly bureaucratic. To fix this, Site Visit Executive has established unity of command and unity of effort to consolidate the modernisation process under one roof.

Current readiness systems only include commander’s best estimate for equipment status. Estimates have traditionally been utilised usually for overall equipment assigned to the unit and not individual pieces of equipment. Military Services use systems to maintain records of equipment under service, but records do not include any information about what units it is assigned to.

Troops coming from operational units will have the best idea of what field-level units need. Site Visit Executive can say ‘If you want it bad, here’s how much it costs, here’s how much schedule you lose.’ Today the state of the process is split, it’s like the 4 x 100 relay team — the baton just keeps getting handed off.

Readiness Terms are used in different contexts/processes. Operational gaps in systems used by Field Units must be closed so exchange is seamless. Capability to link information as it is processed by Units must be built. Aggregated metrics provided to Commanders must be traced/linked to operational systems used to rollup information.

Site Visit Executive has highlighted how important it is to streamline, rationalise Readiness Plans; currently DoD structure — the institution, the processes, the organisation is not coherent to deliver effective capabilities for the future-- basically a left-right-left, step-by-step process going from an idea, establishing a requirement, writing up big requirements documents, and then vetting it through multiple steps to delivery of a capability, which takes way too long. You just can’t operate like that in today’s world. You just can’t do it. It’s got to be faster, it’s got to be streamlined, it’s got to be more coherent, and Site Visit Executive has got to bring it all together.

Until now, no Site Visit Executive has yet stood up to identify functions spanning across process and write terms required to support processes. You need to get the operator ranks on a System Build Line, on a tarmac, so they can actually get out there and physically work the configurations.

Troops must be involved with identifying and scouting new gear and capabilities, and every day prove their mettle to solve problems constantly. It’s made life so much easier, because they can tell you with precision what they need and you can make the trade-offs right there. It’s trying to scale that type of behaviour.

For a variety of reasons, aviation depots are struggling to get aircraft through maintenance periods on time. In turn, these delays directly impact the time Troops have to train and sharpen their skills prior to deployment. These challenges are further exacerbated by low stocks of critical parts and fleet-wide shortfalls in ordnance and an aging depot infrastructure.

DoD has testified before Congress about the maintenance and training backlogs that result from high operational tempo, and how addressing those backlogs has been further set back by budget cuts and fiscal uncertainty. Attempts to restore stability and predictability to deployment cycles have been challenged both by constrained funding levels and by operational demands that remain unabated.

The collective pace of operations has increased wear and tear on aircraft and crews and, adding to the downward readiness spiral, has decreased the time available for maintenance and modernisation.

Deferred maintenance has led to equipment failures, and to larger-than- projected work packages for aviation depots. This has forced removal of aircraft from service for extended periods, which in turn increases the tempo for the rest of the fleet, which causes the fleets to utilise available airframes at higher-than-projected rates, which increases the maintenance work, which adds to the backlogs, and so on.

Reversing this vicious cycle and restoring the short-term readiness of the fleet will require sufficient and predictable funding. This funding would allow pilots to fly the training hours they need to remain proficient and ensure required maintenance on aircraft are conducted. It would also enable DoD to restore stocks of necessary parts, getting more aircraft sorties airborne and better preparing them to stay deployed as required.

The first step is to understand and document user requirements and Constraints for system capability so acquisition process can meet requirements. Availability/ reliability parameters must be explained and guide trade-off studies of mission capability and operational support, defining baseline against which the new system will be measured. So performance factors need to be matched up with user needs into clearly defined system parameters and allocate/ integrate parameters to relevant disciplines needed to realise success.

Systems engineering attempts to optimise effectiveness and affordability as the capability is created. The systems approach makes sure the question What are the user needs and constraints? is answered before designing the answer. The top-level programme plan for achieving required available/reliable is executed in manner to ensure requirements are achievable. Through understanding user needs and constraints, new capabilities begin to be defined.

Site Visit Executive has called for a new model-based systems engineering space to facilitate aircraft and weapons system development through a paperless process of generating specifications, digital drawings, and testing the design in virtual training space. Operators want mission capability when a new product is delivered, and DoD has not readily delivered on providing this service to field-level units.

Troops want to know that that capability has been fully characterised, so not only do they know what it does, but they know what it doesn’t do – equally important to them when they take it into combat. DoD is pretty good at providing this service to operators. When capability is delivered to Troops on Day 1 it’s fully integrated with the work/training space they’re expecting to utilise it in. Troops are told what it can do, but typically also get the impression, ‘don’t worry, your training system, your simulator tech is a step or two behind, but it’ll catch up.’ Well, it usually doesn’t catch up.

Weapons systems programme offices need to sit down with operators and understand the requirement on a tactical level: what mission needs to be accomplished, what capability is needed, what threat is being countered, how will the system be used, who will use it, and more. If that information is all included in simulation model, notional placeholder aircraft or weapon can be inserted into the model so smart engineering practises are enabled.

Readiness simulation models can be put back into tactical scenarios where operator is back in step 1 and just see how it goes. What better evaluation or assessment of how the programme is maturing than to actually run the current level of maturity of performance that we see in our models through the tactical situations we’ve built with the operators?

Because in the end that’s what matters, in the end capabilities-based test and evaluation is about testing the capabilities –not about ensuring design/build teams met every huge volume of specs. That’s where DoD spends all valuable time today during Test/Evaluation, validating that design/build teams met the specs. Troops in field-level units couldn’t care less, they want to know that the attributes and the capabilities that they’re counting on will be met.

Site Visit Executive must establish the case for a materiel approach to resolve gaps in weapons system readiness/capability. The primary focus is to acquire quality products balancing process of satisfying user needs while improving mission capability and operational support, also adhering to scheduling constraints and justifiable acquisition costs.

During capability assessments, time and resources need to be set aside to measure and characterise current operational experience, organise metrics and supply line performance to reach conclusions about the causes of shortfalls. It is also imperative to understand subsystem design complexity and influence on availability/reliability. Capabilities-based approach leverages the expertise of all service directorate activities defining new capabilities.

Site Executive has promoted trying to make a move away from a traditional acquisition serial approach to more of an agile sprint-based type of approach to include establishing multi-disciplinary teams. You’ve got the operators and the designers and the testers and everybody working together to get through the most important milestone goals, whatever sprint you agree to, push something out to the field and then go in to the next one.

Primary focus is to ensure that joint force is properly equipped and supported to perform across disciplines to identify improvements to existing capabilities and crate new warfighting capabilities. Process defines needed capabilities through characterisation of doctrine, organisation, training, materiel, leadership, and Labour at Job Sites. Availability/reliability levels are defined within this framework, principally in the category of materiel.

So Goal is to inform and share metrics among decision makers tasked with design, buy, use, and system support. Information to be shared includes user requirements, and how system will be used or potentially miss targets. Key to any Readiness assessments is description of use/support location, constraints on what support is available for system, what metrics will be available to decision makers, and how that information will be verified.

Aircraft maintenance metrics are important. Don’t let anyone tell you differently. Metrics are critical tools to be used by Site Visit Executive to gauge organisation effectiveness and efficiency. In fact, they are roadmaps that let you determine where you’ve been, where you’re going, and how you’re going to get there.

Use of metrics allows you to flick off your organisational autopilot and actually guide your unit. But they must be used correctly to be effective. Chasing metrics for metrics’ sake is not good thing and really proves nothing. Metrics are nothing more than a barometer for pain. Site Visit Executive responsibility is to know where the pain is in order to make it stop. Understanding the unit’s maintenance metrics is only the first part of learning to manage the pain.

Site Visit Executive goals include making maintenance availabilities more efficient, particularly as DoD tries to embrace condition-based maintenance, only fixing or replacing components as needed instead of on a fixed schedule. Supply officers today focus on reactively replacing parts that are consumed from their inventory, instead of using metrics to proactively predicting what parts will be needed and when, which would be more useful in condition-based maintenance regimes.

It is important to look at one of our top readiness metrics source and say, can we be more predictive of the supply side there, reduce the supply line time and get better accuracy around how we provide parts for those types of repairs? You might have to replace a blade on an engine, but you don’t necessarily order the bolts with that part. So can we can create metrics relationships so whenever for example the blade is replaced there is usually this other task to do as well.

So predictive supply systems can be created that would say you just requested to replace the blade on the engine, you might also need these other parts because we find that there’s a high rate of these types of repairs with that as well. And then it’s over to the user. The machine and metrics have presented some courses of action; the user can say, no, we don’t need that—We already checked, or maybe that wasn’t checked, maybe I should do that, let’s go see. Site Visit Executive expects predictive sensor tech can be used to compress maintenance cycles and speed up the time.

Metrics are not just charts and numbers to be looked at. They are tools for fixing problems. If the tool does not generate questions, it is a waste of time. If a lot of time is spent looking at metrics that do not address daily problems affecting the unit, their value is questionable.

When there is no applicable metric for driving unit performance, build one. Watch for filtering of the metrics that show the pain—they are the ones with the greatest value. If a metric rarely meets its prescribed standard, the standard is probably not realistic for one of two reasons—it was arbitrarily set too high, or significant issues need resolution. Either way, investigation into the circumstances is warranted.

Maintenance and supply experts have been surveyed to find out what metrics they collect, through what processes, and to what end. Metrics shouldn’t be collected for metrics sake, but must be considered how metrics collection is actually contributing to their mission. So metrics experts then talk Troops through what metrics could be shared and how, to assist each unit in doing their jobs better, and to ultimately reduce the time it takes for an airplane to come into the depot, maintenance to begin, required parts to be identified, the right parts to arrive at the depot, and the airplane to be sent back out for operations.

Maintenance personnel were given new metrics set to work with and new processes to implement on a trial basis, and preliminary results indicate mean time to repair aircraft is already down. Maintainers have also identified new policies, training areas and additions to metrics that would benefit their operations going forward. It will ultimately be up to Site Visit Executive take those recommendations and create long-term solutions from them, but it looks like DoD could realise significant readiness impact just making a couple key changes.

However, caution is in order at this point. Overemphasis of a particular metric while ignoring the root cause of a problem may well lead to an improvement in the metric but worsening of the problem. Metrics are indicators and, as such, should be viewed in aggregate. The relationship between two metrics may be so intertwined as to make it impossible to separate the cause from the effect.

Generally, metrics should be used to identify trends and not as pass or fail indicators. Individually, they are snapshots in time, and even the best organisations will occasionally dip below standards. Good metrics assessments will focus Site Visit Executive attention on those areas where improvements can be realised and not strive to improve a metric but utilise the information to improve performance of the organisation.

Here we provide handbook is to introduce maintainers at all levels to these necessary tools of trade. We encourage each of you to read this handbook and keep it close at hand for future reference. Discuss the importance of metrics with others responsible for advancing quality skill sets of the maintenance workforce. Service Maintenance Units have best people, parts, and equipment in the world. We submit that this handbook will help you capitalise on these strengths.

Site Visit Executive task is to provide good iron to the operators when needed. Understanding metrics and their use in effectively and efficiently executing aircraft maintenance is key to your ability to uphold important responsibilities placed on your shoulders. Good Luck.

1. What are the common/multiple readiness write-ups for major contributing systems or different systems trends?

2. Is Mission Capable Supply/Mission Impaired Capability Awaiting Parts condition information available on aircraft with high supply times?

3. Are there technical metrics limitations or lack of proper tools or could parts reuse/transfer been a factor?

4. Do pilot reported readiness discrepancies appearance indicate recent corrective trend in system write-ups for major system contributors?

5. How are equipment upgrade/repair shops contacts initiated for repeat/recurs checks made in effort to identify component failures?

6. Have maintenance procedural, training, or skill-level problems impacting overall readiness been identified?

7. How are quality assurance summaries and deferred discrepancy lists reviewed for positive and negative trends identify problem aircraft or systems readiness issues?

8. Do Aircraft scheduling deviations for negative maintenance practices and trends impact work force and stability of workload availabilities?

9. How is maintenance portion of the base/intermediate repair enhancement programme monitored/evaluated?

10. How to determine performance of selected systems, subsystems, and line-replaceable units to isolate source of problems affecting mission readiness capacity?

1 Comment

Top 50 Spare Parts Tracking Dispatch Levers Driving Control of Product Support Execute Systems Change

11/5/2017

0 Comments

 
Execution of field-level spare parts tracking still spans multiple DoD participants responsible for product support service dispatch action such as supply, transportation, or maintenance are all separate and distinct.

Supply personnel determine which parts to stock and in what quantities while transportation personnel are responsible for the movement of these parts between the various components of the logistics system. When a part is broken, another part of the organisation with its own personnel determines how and when to repair items. Adding to the complexity of this structure is the fact that other support areas such as contracting and engineering have their own functional structures and guidelines for operation.

Current force structure, while useful for the control and assignment of personnel, is not aligned to the process of buying and sustaining product support service dispatch of parts required to achieve operational weapons systems availability/reliability.

1. Product Support Contract Type, Length, Cost

Contract type is a term used to signify differences in contract structure or form, including compensation arrangements and amount of product support risk. Wide selection of contract types is available to provide flexibility in acquiring the large variety and volume of supplies and services

2 Product Support Administration Lead Time

Procurement Administrative Lead Time measures the number of days procurement takes from acceptance of a ready procurement request to the day of award. General lead times for commercial acquisition buys are available and may be used as a guideline for product support workload planning

3. Production Lead Time Impact Product Support

Build lead time consists of wait time and throughput time, ie time period between the placement of an order with dispatch service and delivery of the completed order to the customer. A short manufacturing lead time is a competitive advantage since customers want the delivery of product support services as soon as possible following the placement of the order.

4. Parts Product Support Services Agents

Skilled and empowered dispatch agents assist with complex questions and requests, working side-by-side with product support teams, with seat at table in essential decision-making provides round-the-clock support via multiple channels

5. Part Substitute Transfer Product Support

Dispatch checks and controls stocks of spare parts around the clock labeled and valued for reporting and fiscal reasons. Smart product support Logistics models are required to transfer spare parts from warehouse to Job Site. Transport of parts has the same priority as repairs

6. Product Support Service Responsive to Demand

In Demand-Responsive Logistics Model, demand drives supply. Dispatch processes are designed to anticipate changes and flex to empower product support service units plan/configure what it buys, makes, moves, sells, delivers in near real-time demand.

7. Engineer Product Support Quality Control

Plans and directs activities concerned with application, and maintenance of product support quality standards for industrial processes, materials, and products; dispatch initiates standards and methods for inspection, testing, and evaluation

8. Adaptive Supply Product Support Guidelines

Product support supply Logistics designed to be efficient, adaptive and collaborative traits to ensure organisation enters new markets at a scale and pace unmatched by competitors; functions as shared dispatch system

9. Stock Levels Optimise Product Support

Optimisation process addresses selection of Product support logistics models to establish appropriate minimum and maximum stocking levels using dispatch cost assessments considers costs of holding inventory, replenishment, expediting and stock-outs instead of fixed service level approach

10. Product Support Performance Improvements

Field-level customers do not expect products to be perfect, but expect product support dispatch teams to respond fix things quickly when they break down, new service market entrants are succeeding by providing better after-sales services since there is distinct correlation between the quality of after-sales service and customer intent to repurchase.


Top 10 Characteristics of Effective Product Support Dispatch Control Systems

Dispatch controls at every level of product support service focus on inputs, processes and outputs. It is very important to have effective controls at each of these three stages. Effective control systems tend to have certain common characteristics. The importance of these characteristics varies with the product support situation, but in general effective control systems have following characteristics:

1. Dispatch Service Accuracy

Effective dispatch controls generate accurate product support metrics and information. Accurate information is essential for effective decision making while inaccurate controls divert Site Visit Executive efforts and energies on problems that do not exist or have a low priority and would fail to trigger actions to mitigate problems that do require attention.

2. Dispatch Service Timeliness

There are many product support problems that require immediate attention. If information about such problems does not reach Site Visit Executive in a timely manner, then such information may become useless and damage may occur. Accordingly dispatch controls must ensure that information reaches the decision makers when they need it so that a meaningful response can follow.

3. Dispatch Service Flexibility

Operational conditions underpinning product support are always changing. Tech changes occur very fast. A rigid dispatch control system would not be suitable for changing conditions. These changes highlight the need for flexibility in Site Visit Executive planning as well as in control.

4. Dispatch Service Planning

Site Visit Executive must design product support systems that allow for adjustments for unanticipated risks and opportunities. Similarly, modifications must be made in control of dispatcher methods, techniques and systems as they become necessary. An effective control system is one that can be updated quickly as the need arises.

5. Dispatch Service Acceptance

Controls should be such that all dispatchers affected by it are able to understand them fully and accept them into product support service systems. A control system that is difficult to understand can cause unnecessary mistakes and may be met by frustration by busy Site Visit Executive.

6. Dispatch Service Integration

When dispatcher controls are consistent with product support service values, they work seamlessly with organisational policies so they are easier to enforce. These controls become an integrated part of Site Visit Executive attention so they become more effective.

7. Dispatch Service Fiscal Potential Assess

Cost/benefits of dispatcher control systems must be evaluated by Site Visit Executive so product support risks are balanced against its benefits. The system must be worth the cost and reasonable to operate. Accordingly the benefits received must outweigh the cost of implementing a control system.

8. Accurate Dispatch Service Placement

Effective dispatch controls should be placed and emphasised at critical and strategic control points where product support service failures cannot be tolerated and where time and money costs of failures are greatest. Site Visit Executive must determine essential organisational characteristics where deviation from the expected standards will pose the greatest risk. These control areas include production, sales, and product support service.

9. Corrective Dispatch Service Action

An effective dispatch control system not only checks for and identifies product support risks but also is programmed so Site Visit Executive propose solutions to mitigate the risks. For example inventory record keeping can be programmed to establish “if-then” guidelines so if particular item drops below target levels, a signal will be sent for stock replenishment.

10. Dispatch Service Emphasis on Exceptions

A good dispatch control system must work on the exception principle, so that only the must important product support risks are brought to the attention of Site Visit Executive so time is not wasted addressing activities that are running smoothly instead attention is directed towards error and not towards conformity to eliminate unnecessary supervision and marginally beneficial reporting.


Top 10 Components of Product Support Service Buying Structure Plans to Reduce Contract Inefficiencies

Product support plan uses buying power to bring down costs and reduce duplication. Plan takes DoD Schedules to the next level by combining different types of services into one package by creating a single source for both commercial and noncommercial needs – and eliminating the unneeded duplication of contracts.

Product Support plan must offer full and open competition among all interested businesses, function as separate solicitation set aside specifically for businesses of all sizes/products, maximising opportunities to buy products.

Product Support plan is specially designed for integrated professional services, with input from the providers and field-level users of these services. The rigorous application process helps to streamline dispatch activity, and it is designed to provide customers with solution to allow for both commercial and noncommercial requirements and all contract types at the task-order level.

Product Support plan will span the core disciplines of programme services, dispatch consulting, logistics services, engineering services, and budget services. Plan will also allow for additional support components, like Information Technology or dispatch service support to be included as part of a total solution to professional services requirements.

Product Support plan is reliable, flexible and efficient way for DoD to obtain best-value solutions for complex professional services. Dispatch service breaks down barriers in the world of acquisition by providing customers with a total professional services solution across the enterprise allows for both commercial and noncommercial requirements and all contract types

Product Support plan to create/implement new support and dispatch communications programme in the event of crisis and allow the agency to award a single task order to:

1. Predict the scope of product support and dispatch communication service requirements under multiple operational scenarios

2. Consider and recommend alternative methods of delivering product support and dispatch communications services

3. Design product support dispatch programme infrastructure

4. Establish product support and dispatcher communication logistics requirements

5. Determine budget requirements for product support service requirements

6. Establish dispatch product support service control procedures

7. Develop resourcing plan for implementation of dispatch product support programme

8. Determine product support system dispatcher service requirements

9. Establish information tech requirements for product support dispatch

10. Implement programme decisions taken by DoD for field-level product support


Top 10 Dispatcher Quick Check to See all Product Support Work Order Activities Linked to Assist Conflict Checks/Schedules

Dispatcher Procedural Control allows the steps of a common product support process to be programmed as status updates in the each activity, reflecting workflow. These tasks and requirements can be made essential to move the activity onto the next stage. Each step can trigger automated actions, such as reports, emails, pop-up messages or task work order descriptions.

Dispatchers are able to link Multiple Object records to a single activity record, making it easier to perform product support tasks in bulk, such as updating a group of proposed acquisitions to accessioned status.

Dispatchers can link to associated status updates and attach any media descriptions of product support Logistics services work orders. For each activity, tasks are defined, scheduled and assigned.

Dispatchers have enabled search function of all product support metrics/information and can be exported for reporting purposes and work orders generated from Activities List cost/benefits as follows:

1. Multiple Dispatchers involved in status update activities can access Activities records and enter information

2. All information relating to Dispatcher product support metrics collection is recorded in one place

3. It is easier for Dispatchers to perform product support work order tasks in bulk

4. Dispatchers can control sequence of events and set requirements for each step in product support process

5. Dispatchers can route product support service work order information from one activity record to another

6. Dispatchers can save entry time by linking Acquisition Proposal to materiel condition in product support reports

7. Dispatchers can generate status update product support templates with information taken directly from an Activities record

8. Dispatchers can assign/schedule work order Tasks to determine cost/benefit of product support actions

9. Dispatcher access to all product support information relating to collection activities is fully searchable

10. Easy for Dispatchers to check/schedule work order conflict resolutions required for efficient product support services


Top 10 Task Force Recommend Contract Features Set of Standardised Dispatch Action Transparency Provisions

1. Dispatch action transparency provisions encourage an active ‘push’ of information

2. Contracting authorities and suppliers equally committed to dispatch action transparency

3. Dispatcher action transparency provisions should include an absolute obligation of product support service
4. Administrative reporting on product support service contract performance

5. Suppliers must have opportunity to verify product support information before it is released.

6. Dispatcher action transparency provisions must set out how/when contracting authority is obligated to consult with suppliers

7. Track adoption of dispatch action transparency provisions in new contracts test provisions as demonstration project

8. Dispatch action transparency provisions commit contracting authorities and suppliers

9. Provide advice from field-level unit customers on how best dispatch action transparency information can be presented

10. Support simultaneous work orders to examine and where dispatch action transparency provisions should apply to subcontractors
0 Comments

    Site Visit Executive

    Provides Periodic Updates Operation Status

    Archives

    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    April 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Web Hosting by Dotster