Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
 
      

Skip Navigation LinksDiscussions List : What do you think are the greatest barriers to PBL approaches

Started: 2/23/2017 3:45 PM
Picture: ELIZABETH LEDERER
ELIZABETH LEDERER
What do you think are the greatest barriers to PBL approaches?
(no text)
Picture: ELIZABETH LEDERER
  • ELIZABETH LEDERER
http://myad.dau.mil:80/User%20Photos/Profile%20Pictures/elederer_MThumb.jpg?t=63623481641" alt="Picture: ELIZABETH LEDERER" />
ELIZABETH LEDERER
42/23/2017 3:45 PM2/23/2017 3:45 PMNoAsk the Community
4.686043596635
512/5/2012 3:49 PM
Posted: 4/3/2017 3:59 PM
Picture: JEROME JOHNSTON
JEROME JOHNSTON

It is common knowledge that PBL programs are very complex to design, develop, implement and manage.  One cannot take a "cookie cutter approach" to PBL program development, as they are all different.  To that end, it takes a special logistician, with a unique set of skills to accomplish the task of PBL program implementation.  In my opinion, one of the greatest barriers to PBL approaches is not having a logistician on staff who has the resources, and the skills necessary to implement those available resources, to develop and implement a PBL program. 

Picture: JEROME JOHNSTON
  • JEROME JOHNSTON
http://myad.dau.mil:80/User%20Photos/Profile%20Pictures/jjohnston01_MThumb.jpg?t=63625290620" alt="Picture: JEROME JOHNSTON" />
JEROME JOHNSTON

It is common knowledge that PBL programs are very complex to design, develop, implement and manage.  One cannot take a "cookie cutter approach" to PBL program development, as they are all different.  To that end, it takes a special logistician, with a unique set of skills to accomplish the task of PBL program implementation.  In my opinion, one of the greatest barriers to PBL approaches is not having a logistician on staff who has the resources, and the skills necessary to implement those available resources, to develop and implement a PBL program. 

ELIZABETH LEDERER504/3/2017 3:59 PM4/3/2017 3:59 PM
4/3/2017 3:33 PM1
WILLIAM COBERLY
Posted: 11/8/2017 7:17 AM
Picture: ADAM STROUP
ADAM STROUP

I think one barrier is being able to appropriately describe the performance standards for a given situation.  The difficulty is when the supplier or maintainer is not responsible for all aspects of the program, so an availability st​andard at the system level is not an appropriate, enforceable standard.  Selecting standards for subsystems may be possible.  This barrier is answering "How do you know you are getting the performance level you are paying for on the contract?"  Put the appropriate standards in the contract and then assess those standards--that's not easy and leads to a barrier.

Picture: ADAM STROUP
  • ADAM STROUP
http://myad.dau.mil:80/User%20Photos/Profile%20Pictures/astroup_MThumb.jpg?t=63628988073" alt="Picture: ADAM STROUP" />
ADAM STROUP

I think one barrier is being able to appropriately describe the performance standards for a given situation.  The difficulty is when the supplier or maintainer is not responsible for all aspects of the program, so an availability st​andard at the system level is not an appropriate, enforceable standard.  Selecting standards for subsystems may be possible.  This barrier is answering "How do you know you are getting the performance level you are paying for on the contract?"  Put the appropriate standards in the contract and then assess those standards--that's not easy and leads to a barrier.

ELIZABETH LEDERER5011/8/2017 7:17 AM11/8/2017 7:17 AM
4/28/2017 8:46 AM2
WILLIAM COBERLY
JEROME JOHNSTON
Posted: 11/8/2017 7:41 AM
Picture Placeholder: EDWARD ZARNESKY
EDWARD ZARNESKY

The complexity of PBL is how do the stakeholders know what "good", "better" and "best" is?  How to "measure" the desirement?  Lastly "how to value the desirement"?  I had a MACOM G3 nearly convulse when I discussed with him the PBL appraoch the boss was focusing on - 90% Operational Availability.  The iniital reaction was "far to low", the units needs 97% or better.  When asked isn't the C1 rating 90%?  I got a downtrodden response of "well yeah but...".  I asked what if we "demand 90% (good, compliant with "threshold regulatory and statuatory requirements"), minorly reward 95% (better and still compliant) and handsomely reward 98% (best, compliant and required to be affordable) while maintaining cost as nuetral?  The G3 brighten and responded he coudl fully support such an approach.  The devli of course was craftign the performance requirements and measurement and cost systems to support such an endeavor! 

Picture Placeholder: EDWARD ZARNESKY
  • EDWARD ZARNESKY
/_layouts/15/images/person.gif" alt="Picture Placeholder: EDWARD ZARNESKY" />
EDWARD ZARNESKY

The complexity of PBL is how do the stakeholders know what "good", "better" and "best" is?  How to "measure" the desirement?  Lastly "how to value the desirement"?  I had a MACOM G3 nearly convulse when I discussed with him the PBL appraoch the boss was focusing on - 90% Operational Availability.  The iniital reaction was "far to low", the units needs 97% or better.  When asked isn't the C1 rating 90%?  I got a downtrodden response of "well yeah but...".  I asked what if we "demand 90% (good, compliant with "threshold regulatory and statuatory requirements"), minorly reward 95% (better and still compliant) and handsomely reward 98% (best, compliant and required to be affordable) while maintaining cost as nuetral?  The G3 brighten and responded he coudl fully support such an approach.  The devli of course was craftign the performance requirements and measurement and cost systems to support such an endeavor! 

ELIZABETH LEDERER5011/8/2017 7:41 AM11/8/2017 7:41 AM
11/8/2017 7:21 AM1
WILLIAM COBERLY
Posted: 11/8/2017 9:44 AM
Picture Placeholder: WILLIAM COBERLY
WILLIAM COBERLY

I absolutely agree with all the responses to this thought-provoking question.  It is with a lot of experience and study that I hope to help resolve all of the responses.  It is my opinion, that there are two major factors that affect the entire DOD "acquisition" approach.  The entire DOD "acquisition" approach is more than just PBL. These two major factors are not easy to implement but the return on investment should easily justify their implementations. 

  1. Let's start building a strong house on a strong foundation.  In my opinion, what is needed is an Enterprise Architecture.  What is an Enterprise Architecture?  The goal is to have an ability to understand everything we do via standards, using a common dialog, having the ability to measure the duration of functions, latency between internal and external functions, roles and responsibilities for the organizations that have a stake in the product. It starts by building an "As is" Architecture using measures to create a "to-be" architecture. Using this approach, for each "system", at a certain level of abstraction the functions performed are the same. I am very familiar with various architectural methods.  The inability of DODAF to address all organizations that have a stake in the product makes it insufficient to address the goal.  I am a proponent of TOGAF. There are already a bunch of stovepipe efforts that dance around this topic: measurement @ https://www.milsuite.mil/book/community/spaces/orion/sms and the Army Office of Business Transformation -Lean Six Sigma, and DOD CIO for the DODAF effort. As a former Chief Architect on an ACAT 1 program, I understand these, and think an implementation of TOGAF can tie it all together.
  2. Let's address organizational turbulence. Constant organizational turbulence impacts the efficiency of an organization. Understanding of responsibility and control within an organization under constant organizational turbulence is a major consequence of organizational turbulence.  Responsibility for an organization or product does not automatically come with control and, responsibility without control significantly impacts personal and organizational effectiveness.  While numerous papers discuss the programmatic challenges that impact the ability to bring a product to market (or in the DOD parlance "fielding the product"), I am writing a paper discusses the necessity to put an equal part of the focus on understanding the maturity of organizations. It should seem obvious that there is a relationship of a low turnover rate to organizational efficiency.  I show that creating an "efficient" organization equates to a mature organization that brings with it a plethora of benefits.  It should be self-evident that organizational turbulence impacts the efficiency of product development and, it's operation.

I hope this helps.

Picture Placeholder: WILLIAM COBERLY
  • WILLIAM COBERLY
/_layouts/15/images/person.gif" alt="Picture Placeholder: WILLIAM COBERLY" />
WILLIAM COBERLY

I absolutely agree with all the responses to this thought-provoking question.  It is with a lot of experience and study that I hope to help resolve all of the responses.  It is my opinion, that there are two major factors that affect the entire DOD "acquisition" approach.  The entire DOD "acquisition" approach is more than just PBL. These two major factors are not easy to implement but the return on investment should easily justify their implementations. 

  1. Let's start building a strong house on a strong foundation.  In my opinion, what is needed is an Enterprise Architecture.  What is an Enterprise Architecture?  The goal is to have an ability to understand everything we do via standards, using a common dialog, having the ability to measure the duration of functions, latency between internal and external functions, roles and responsibilities for the organizations that have a stake in the product. It starts by building an "As is" Architecture using measures to create a "to-be" architecture. Using this approach, for each "system", at a certain level of abstraction the functions performed are the same. I am very familiar with various architectural methods.  The inability of DODAF to address all organizations that have a stake in the product makes it insufficient to address the goal.  I am a proponent of TOGAF. There are already a bunch of stovepipe efforts that dance around this topic: measurement @ https://www.milsuite.mil/book/community/spaces/orion/sms and the Army Office of Business Transformation -Lean Six Sigma, and DOD CIO for the DODAF effort. As a former Chief Architect on an ACAT 1 program, I understand these, and think an implementation of TOGAF can tie it all together.
  2. Let's address organizational turbulence. Constant organizational turbulence impacts the efficiency of an organization. Understanding of responsibility and control within an organization under constant organizational turbulence is a major consequence of organizational turbulence.  Responsibility for an organization or product does not automatically come with control and, responsibility without control significantly impacts personal and organizational effectiveness.  While numerous papers discuss the programmatic challenges that impact the ability to bring a product to market (or in the DOD parlance "fielding the product"), I am writing a paper discusses the necessity to put an equal part of the focus on understanding the maturity of organizations. It should seem obvious that there is a relationship of a low turnover rate to organizational efficiency.  I show that creating an "efficient" organization equates to a mature organization that brings with it a plethora of benefits.  It should be self-evident that organizational turbulence impacts the efficiency of product development and, it's operation.

I hope this helps.

ELIZABETH LEDERER5011/8/2017 9:44 AM11/8/2017 9:44 AM
11/8/2017 8:43 AM1
JEROME JOHNSTON