Prolonged Cycle Times and Schedule Growth in Defense Acquisition: A Literature Review

Abstract : This report summarizes a selection of the acquisition literature from the 1960s to the present on potential sources of program schedule cycle time and growth, as well as potential opportunities for improvement. It presents the range of possible causes of schedule-related problems and various recommendations cited for improving schedules by various authors and organizations. This report does not provide critical analysis or an assessment of the strengths or weaknesses of the claims made in the literature. Rather, it provides a starting point for further research or consideration by government acquisition professionals, oversight organizations, and the analytic community. We identified the following reasons for schedule delays in the literature: (1) the difficulty of managing technical risk (e.g., program complexity, immature technology, and unanticipated technical issues), (2) initial assumptions or expectations that were difficult to fulfill (e.g., schedule estimates, risk control, requirements, and performance assumptions), and (3) funding instability. The most commonly cited recommendations for reducing cycle time and controlling schedule growth in the literature are strategies that manage or reduce technical risk. Some of those recommendations include using incremental fielding or evolutionary acquisition strategies, developing derivative products (rather than brand-new designs), using mature or proven technology (i.e., commercial, off-the-shelf components), maintaining stable funding, and using atypical contracting vehicles.

[1]  Jerry M. Sollinger,et al.  Methodologies in Analyzing the Root Causes of Nunn-McCurdy Breaches , 2012 .

[2]  Thomas H. Miller Does MRAP Provide a Model for Acquisition Reform , 2010 .

[3]  Jack Strauss,et al.  Survival Guide for Truly Schedule Driven Development Programs , 2008 .

[4]  Mary Ann Lapham,et al.  Considerations for Using Agile in DoD Acquisition , 2010 .

[5]  INDEFINITE DELIVERY/INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) REMEDIAL ACTION CONTRACT FOR NEW BEDFORD HARBOR SUPERFUND SITE , 2014 .

[6]  Christopher G. Pernin,et al.  Lessons from the Army's Future Combat Systems Program , 2013 .

[7]  William M. Cashman Why Schedules Slip: Actual Reasons for Schedule Problems Across Large Air Force System Development Efforts. , 1995 .

[8]  Kenneth R. Mayer The Development of the Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile: A Case Study of Risk and Reward in Weapon System Acquisition , 1993 .

[9]  James M. Campbell,et al.  COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES , 2005 .

[10]  Susan J Bodilly Case Study of Risk Management in the USAF LANTIRN Program , 1993 .

[11]  Michael X. Cohen,et al.  It's about Time , 2010, Front. Hum. Neurosci.

[12]  Mark A. Lorell,et al.  An Overview of Acquisition Reform Cost Savings Estimates , 2001 .

[13]  Clifford A. Grammich,et al.  Assessing the Impact of Requiring Justification and Approval Review for Sole Source 8(a) Native American Contracts in Excess of $20 Million , 2013 .

[14]  J. Ronald Fox,et al.  Defense Acquisition Reform, 19602009: An Elusive Goal , 2011 .

[15]  Lawrence R. Jones,et al.  Reform of program budgeting in the Department of Defense , 2004 .

[16]  William R Fast,et al.  Improving Defense Acquisition Decision Making , 2010 .

[17]  Christopher H Hanks,et al.  Reexamining Military Acquisition Reform: Are We There Yet? , 2005 .

[18]  Kenneth R. Mayer,et al.  Barriers to Managing Risk in Large Scale Weapons System Development Programs , 1994 .

[19]  J. R. Nelson,et al.  Prototyping Defense Systems , 1991 .

[20]  Dominique Meyers Acquisition Reform -- Inside the Silver Bullet. A Comparative Analysis -- JDAM versus F-22 , 2002 .

[21]  John Birkler,et al.  Determining When Competition Is a Reasonable Strategy for the Production Phase of Defense Acquisition , 2009 .

[22]  Mark A. Lorell,et al.  Evolutionary Acquisition: Implementation Challenges for Defense Space Programs , 2006 .

[23]  Tim Dowd Obtaining Greater Efficiency and Productivity in Defense Spending , 2011 .

[24]  Jeffrey A. Drezner,et al.  On Prototyping: Lessons from RAND Research , 2009 .

[25]  Jessie Riposo,et al.  Improving Air Force Enterprise Resource Planning-Enabled Business Transformation , 2013 .

[26]  Michael J. Sullivan Defense Acquisitions. Rapid Acquisition of MRAP Vehicles , 2009 .

[27]  Charles K. Gailey Predictive Power for Program Success from Engineering and Manufacturing Development Performance Trends , 2002 .

[28]  Jerry M. Sollinger,et al.  F-22a Multiyear Procurement Program: An Assessment of Cost Savings , 2007 .

[29]  Bernard Fox,et al.  Test and Evaluation Trends and Costs for Aircraft and Guided Weapons , 2005 .

[30]  Clifford A. Grammich,et al.  Monitoring the Progress of Shipbuilding Programmes: How Can the Defence Procurement Agency More Accurately Monitor Progress? , 2005 .

[31]  Mark A. Lorell,et al.  Lessons Learned from the F/A-22 and F/A-18 E/F Development Programs , 2005 .

[32]  Neang I. Om,et al.  Acquiring Major Systems: Cost and Schedule Trends and Acquisition Initiative Effectiveness , 1989 .

[33]  Irv Blickstein,et al.  A Preliminary Analysis of Advance Appropriations As a Budgeting Method for Navy Ship Procurements , 2002 .

[34]  Frank Camm,et al.  How Funding Instability Affects Army Programs , 2007 .

[35]  Jeffrey A. Drezner,et al.  An Analysis of Weapon System Acquisition Schedules , 1990 .

[36]  Jeffrey A Drezner Competition and Innovation under Complexity , 2009 .

[37]  Bruce Held Improving the Department of Defense's Small Business Innovation Research Program , 2007 .

[38]  Mark A. Lorell,et al.  "Evolutionary Acquisition" Is a Promising Strategy, But Has Been Difficult to Implement , 2006 .

[39]  Joshua Anderson,et al.  Unleashing the Predictive Power of the Integrated Master Schedule: The Planning and Scheduling Excellence Guide (PASEG) , 2012 .

[40]  Raymond W. Reig A DECADE OF SUCCESS AND FAILURES IN THE DOD ACQUISITION SYSTEM , 1995 .

[41]  Michael C Howitz The Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle, A Case Study , 2008 .

[42]  Shari Lawrence Pfleeger,et al.  Evaluation and Recommendations for Improvement of the Department of Defense Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program , 2006 .