Transcript Combining analysis strands in a main gate submission

Combining Analysis
strands in a
Main Gate Submission
Analysis questions for Business
Case
• How good does the ship need to be in its primary role?
• How balanced is the ship across all of its capabilities?
• Is the solution cost-effective?
• How many ships should be bought?
July 2001
© Dstl 2001
Dstl is part of the
Ministry of Defence
Bring together three strands of
analysis
• Platform Numbers Study
• Decision Conferencing
• Combat System OA
July 2001
© Dstl 2001
Dstl is part of the
Ministry of Defence
Decision Conferencing Process
• Structured series of stakeholder meetings to:
– identify significantly different options for capability functions
– evaluate cost of each option and its benefits against a range of
criteria
– judge relative importance of differences between options and
between criteria
– use supporting tool to derive theoretically optimum outline
design
– modify theoretical design by applying additional judgement
July 2001
© Dstl 2001
Dstl is part of the
Ministry of Defence
Benefits of Conferencing Approach
• Examined full breadth of the platform and combat system;
• Unearthed critical issues;
• Winnowed down the vast number of potential combinations of
elements of the platform and combat system;
• Achieved a high degree of consensus across a broad range of MOD
stakeholders;
• Identified areas requiring more detailed analysis;
• Provided a starting point (‘ball-park’) for the prime contractor’s
design process;
• Provided part of the audit trail at Main Gate for why the proposed
design was appropriate and cost effective
July 2001
© Dstl 2001
Dstl is part of the
Ministry of Defence
Concerns about the Conferencing
Approach
• Fundamentally judgemental
• Does not take account of interactions between
capabilities
• Complexity of judgements
• Apparent precision of outputs
• Limited consideration of scenarios
• Treatment of Life Cycle Costs
July 2001
© Dstl 2001
Dstl is part of the
Ministry of Defence
Combat System Analysis Methods
• Area 1
– Military Judgement Panels - Soft
– Monte Carlo Simulation Battle Model - Hard
• Area 2
– Parallel Applied Research Programme (ARP) Study
– Performance figures for systems - Performance
– Military Judgement Panel - with appropriate experts - Soft
– insights from previous analysis work - Soft/Hard
• Area 3
– Parallel ARP study - Performance
– OA to assess implications of performance - Hard
July 2001
© Dstl 2001
Dstl is part of the
Ministry of Defence
Steps in Combat System Analysis
• Identify a number of combination options for each Area
• Evaluate each combination option with the techniques
listed
• Extract findings on each combination option
• Extract findings on each system of interest
• Summarise implications for differing levels of capability
through life
July 2001
© Dstl 2001
Dstl is part of the
Ministry of Defence
Bringing it together
• Platform Numbers Study demonstrated the number of
ships required
• Decision Conferencing process identified militarily
acceptable options with good benefit/cost
• For systems identified as needing further detailed work,
the Combat System OA identified the option level
required to avoid significant shortfalls
• Comparisons were made of the cost and qualitative
effectiveness of alternative combinations of options
July 2001
© Dstl 2001
Dstl is part of the
Ministry of Defence
Combat System Option
Individual
System
Options
Total
A
B
Total
Total
3
3
2
2
3
2
1
3
3
1
3
2
1
2
3
1
1
3
2
1
Total
Option 6
Option 5
Option 4
3
2
1
1
3
1
1
4
2
1
3
2
1
1
3
1
1
3
2
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
2
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
Option 3
Option 2
Option 1
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
Total
Total
No Shortfall
Significant
Shortfall
C
D
Findings on
Individual
System
Options
Minor
Shortfall
E
F
G
H
Excess of
Capability
I
J
July 2001
© Dstl 2001
Dstl is part of the
Ministry of Defence
Features of the Analysis
• Consideration of evolution of capability (First of Class
(FOC) and Class)
– implications of many ships at FOC capability for several years
• Close working on high level and system level OA
• Combination of broad/judgemental and deep/analytical
methods
• Results included both qualitative and quantitative
July 2001
© Dstl 2001
Dstl is part of the
Ministry of Defence
Future Improvements
• Expend greater effort on problem structuring
– bring in additional techniques
– recognition that this brings much of the benefit and is key in
driving the solution space
• Maximising the supporting evidence to the judgements
• Ensure the broad and deep analyses work together
– e.g. broad - deep - broad approach
July 2001
© Dstl 2001
Dstl is part of the
Ministry of Defence