Toward a Performance- and Quality-Based Adaptive Acquisition Framework —AAF Meets International Standards

Eugene A. Razzetti

As stated in Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 5000.02 of Jan. 23, 2020, “the Adaptive Acquisition Framework (AAF) supports the DoD with the objective of delivering effective, suitable, survivable, sustainable, and affordable solutions to the end user in a timely manner. To achieve those objectives, Milestone Decision Authorities (MDAs), other Decision Authorities (DAs), and Program Managers (PMs) have broad authority to plan and manage their programs consistent with sound business practice. The AAF acquisition pathways provide opportunities for MDAs/DAs and PMs to develop acquisition strategies and employ acquisition processes that match the characteristics of the capability being acquired.”

There’s more!

“Performance Based Acquisition (PBA) is a method of preparing service contracts that emphasizes the service outcomes the Government would like the contractor to provide. The use of PBA has been encouraged by the Office of Management and Budget to drive down the costs of contracts while improving contractor performance.”

What that means for PMs is that DoD tells contractors what capability it wants, and then leaves it to them to determine how to satisfy that capability.

Does that make life easier for PMs, or help to ensure a product built most efficiently—on time and within budget? Not by itself. In fact, it exchanges one set of concerns for another set, and leaves policing the contracts and creating a quality product as challenging as ever.

The two primary directives of the AAF are (1) DoD Directive (DoDD) 5000.01 The Defense Acquisition System (DAS); and (2) DoDI 5000.02: Operation of the Adaptive Acquisition Framework.

DoDD 5000.01 prescribes that the DoD will:
… employ the following operating policies:

1. Simplify acquisition policy
2. Tailored acquisition approaches
3. Empower PMs
4. Conduct data-driven analysis
5. Actively manage risk
6. Emphasize sustainment.

Word searches for terms such as quality, audit, verification, and validation will receive a “no matches were found” response for both directives.

We will go into each of these six directed operating policies in the sections that follow. Two realities will form the basic theme of this article:
(1) The directives provide little guidance regarding how to realize these policies, leaving it to PMs.
(2) Word searches for the following fundamental management terms: quality, audit, verification, validation, feedback, follow-up, and accountability, will get you: “No matches were found” for both directives.

A word search of other fundamental program management catchwords, such as measurement, objectives, risk, and performance, will lead the reader to an appropriate number of matches in all the appropriate places. Our job is to support the catchwords with a solid underpinning of sound management practices used successfully over many years by forward-thinking companies in the private sector. PMs can do this by planning a quality management system and making it part of the AAF in general and each acquisition project in particular.

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is a worldwide federation of national standards bodies. Preparation of International Standards, such as those discussed here, is carried out by technical committees in response to industry demand. Independent certification bodies “certify” organizations to applicable ISO Standards, and, in doing so, attest to the effectiveness of the organization as a responsible provider of quality goods and services.

Government contractors (e.g., shipyards, weapons manufacturers) who certify to applicable ISO Standards are more likely to deliver a “quality” product—on time and within budget. ISO-certified contractors often receive (appropriately) the inside track in the awards process. Many DoD contracts specifically require contractor applicants to be certified to one of the Standards prior to the proposal submission date. This can give added value to both DoD and the contractors. However, it also can lead to what we auditors call “just-in-time certification,” which is often perfunctory. The ink on the certificate is barely dry, and there is no documented ISO-acceptable performance. An organization certified to any of the ISO Standards, in my opinion, requires about one year of actual implementation practice and self-audit before the standard reaches its maximum contribution.

I have been a practicing ISO auditor and consultant since 1996, and remain a staunch advocate. PMs and staffs can download the ISO Standards (available online) to develop and implement viable program management in accordance with the AAF. The standards will help PMs with the “how” component of program management; they do not add anything to the “what” component. They do not require any additional work from PMs. In fact, streamlining already existing areas such as “risk management,” “internal auditing,” “reports management,” and “goals and objectives,” routinely reduces wasteful or redundant effort for certified organizations.

Explaining any (or all) of the ISO Standards is too great an undertaking for this article. Tables 1 and 2 will give you the idea. The standards mentioned here have clauses that provide excellent guidance for the development and operation of quality-management systems. If you are not familiar with the ISO family of International Standards, maybe you need to learn about them, and if your vendors are not ISO-certified, maybe they should be.

Put the emphasis on the results to be achieved—the deeds to be done.

—Joseph M. Juran, quality management consultant and engineer

Where AAF Meets ISO

Table 1 takes the six “operating policies” of the AAF (source: DoDD 5000.01) and recommends appropriate ISO support processes. Here is where AAF meets ISO.

Here is a deeper look into the AAF operating policies and ISO requirements that address them.

(1) Simplify acquisition policy

It’s reassuring to remember that even the most complicated strategic acquisition policy for the most complicated government program can be managed using quality evangelist Joseph M. Juran’s basic formula for getting results:

• Establish specific goals to be reached.
• Establish plans for reaching the goals.
• Assign clear responsibility for meeting the goals.
• Base the rewards on the results achieved.

Acquisition policies need only to satisfy these four criteria. Goals must be “aimed-at” targets, toward which all the effort is expended. This is how you “simplify” the acquisition policy. The ISO Standards provide excellent structure to formulate acquisition policy. It does this by adding the ability to measure success through programs such as internal (self) audit, management review, risk management, data collection and analysis, corrective action, and feedback.

(2) Tailor Acquisition Approaches

PMs are told to consider acquisition approaches that leverage international acquisition and supportability planning to improve economies of scale, strengthen the defense industrial base, and enhance coalition partner capabilities to prepare for joint operations.

The actual type of contract is often a done deal long in advance of approach development. Similarly, regulatory requirements are not open for discussion. Accordingly, our focus is on what the approach must include, regardless of the type of the contract. Space limitations preclude lengthy discussion here, but PMs need to focus on time and security. Acquisition approaches are a function of the mission and its urgency; and time and security will always be vital to the “tailoring” (i.e., streamlining) process(es). The more urgent the Warfighter’s mission—the more tailored the approach.

(3) Empower PMs

PMs are expected to plan their acquisition programs in a thoughtful, innovative, and disciplined manner. Library shelves are filled with recommended approaches—some appropriate and some not. Unmentioned is the amount of empowerment given and the form that it takes, as well as the manner in which program progress is measured.

The ISO Standards, when employed by PMs, not only empower, but provide defensible measurements of success and the justifications for actionable correction. Clause 9.3: Management Review and Clause 5.1: Leadership and Commitment, in the latest ISO 9000 Standard, provide the foundation for an effective and successful program for “empowered” management. Following the steps of the clauses creates uncomplicated programs, leading to quality products, by way of solid processes and acceptable risks.

I commanded a U.S. Naval Station in the late 1980s. “Environment” and “ecology” were the catchwords, and the “responsible line commander” was in the crosshairs. We were not even told what to do, let alone how to do it. We were promised only that an environmental incident (e.g., harbor pollution) meant loss of job and career and maybe even a civil lawsuit. I developed a set of checklists and wrote an instruction for the subordinate and tenant commands, and then I set up an audit and inspection process. My boss and I kept our jobs, but what I wouldn’t have given for an environmental management system like ISO 14000 back then. The first version of ISO 14000: Environmental Management Systems appeared in 1996.

(4) Conduct Data-Driven Analysis

DoDI 5000.02 directs that product support personnel and PMs: “make use of data-driven decision-making tools with appropriate predictive analysis capabilities to improve systems availability and reduce costs.” Again, it leaves the managers on their own with regard to how to collect the data, from what sources, and what to do with the data once collected.

ISO 9001:2015 (operative version) Clause 9.1.3: “Analysis and Evaluation” guides PMs and staffs through the data collection and analyses process, giving collected data purpose and utility. Equally important, it guides PMs away from collection and/or reliance on meaningless, misleading, or otherwise irrelevant data.

(5) Actively Manage Risk

DoD tasks PMs to “Establish a risk management program to ensure program cost, schedule, and performance objectives are achieved, and to communicate the process for managing program uncertainty. In consultation with the user representative, the PM will determine which environment, safety, and occupational health risks must be eliminated or mitigated, and which risks can be accepted.”

ISO 9001:2015 Clauses 4.4.1 (f) and 6.1 describe “risks and opportunities.” It is in the coupling of these two terms that PMs can assure themselves that their quality management system can achieve its desired results, enhance its desired effects, prevent/reduce undesired effects, and achieve continual improvement.

ISO 28001:2007 describes “risk-based thinking” when dealing with security risks in the supply chain.

(6) Emphasize Sustainment

DoDD 5000.01 requires DoD Components to acquire systems, subsystems, equipment, supplies, product support, sustainment, and services in accordance with the statutory requirements for competition. Defining “sustainment” itself and in relation to other terms (e.g., life cycle) remains a challenge for the PM. However, an ISO 9000-based Quality Management System (in the aggregate) is a Sustainment Plan. Table 2 includes some of the ISO 9000 clauses that would help to create both a comprehensive Quality Management System (QMS) and a viable Sustainment Plan.

Table 3 compares four of the ISO family of Quality Management Systems (QMS) with the tenets of the Defense Acquisition System, as described in DoDI 5000.02.

The four International Standards support and complement each other and provide useful guidance for virtually any DoD program or contract.

ISO: Triumph of Titanium Over Boilerplate

Table 3. Applying Some ISO/QMS Processes to AAF Tenets

Summary

Check out these two quotes:

(1) DoDD 5000.01, Sept. 9, 2020:

“Joint concepts, standardization, and integrated architectures will be used to the maximum extent possible to characterize the exchange of data, information, materiel, and services to and from systems, units, and platforms to assure all systems effectively and securely interoperate with other U.S. forces and coalition partner systems.”

(2) DoDI 5000.02, Jan. 23, 2020:

“Under the supervision of PMs, product support managers develop, plan, and implement a comprehensive product support strategy for all integrated product support elements and their material readiness. Product support managers will make use of data-driven decision-making tools with appropriate predictive analysis capabilities to improve systems availability and reduce costs.”

The DoD directives provide guidance about “what to do,” but little direction regarding “how to do it” (or even how to know when you have done it), leaving it to program managers; and word search of the following terms: “quality,” “audit,” “verification,” and “validation” will get receive a “no matches were found” response to both directives.

The ISO Quality Management Standards and clauses designated in the tables provide excellent direction for the development and operation of effective quality management systems in full compliance with AAF requirements and giving full support to DoD programs.
Many DoD contracts specifically require contractor applicants to be certified to one of the Standards prior to the proposal submission deadline. “Just-in-time certification” is often perfunctory, with no documented ISO-acceptable performance. An organization certified to any of the ISO Standards, in my opinion, requires about one year of implementation, execution, and self-audit before it reaches its maximum contribution.

The ISO Standards are available online. You can order or download them in the time it took to read this. If you are not familiar with the ISO family of International Standards, maybe you need to learn about them; and if your vendors are not ISO-certified, maybe they should be.

Read the full issue of
Defense Acquisition magazine

RAZZETTI, a retired U.S. Navy captain, is a management consultant, auditor, military analyst, and frequent contributor to Defense Acquisition magazine and the former Defense AT&L magazine. He is the author of five management books, including Hardening by Auditing—A Handbook for Improving the Security Management of Any Organization.

The author can be reached at [email protected].

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the Department of Defense. Reproduction or reposting of articles from Defense Acquisition magazine should credit the authors and the magazine.