Joint Assessment and Enabling Capability (JAEC)

1
Joint Assessment and Enabling Capability(JAEC)

• Bill Millward
• Technical Lead, JAEC

2
Outline

• JAEC Background
• Performance Assessment Concept
• OSD Balanced Scorecard T2 contribution
• Strategies for the Future

3
Training Transformation Vision and Capabilities
4
Training Transformation Background

• To achieve training system transparency in joint
  force operations, the Deputy Secretary of Defense
  established the following training transformation
  objectives to better enable joint operations
• Strengthen joint operations by better preparing
  forces for new warfighting concepts
• Continuously improve joint force readiness by
  aligning joint education and training
  capabilities and resources with combatant command
  needs
• Develop individuals and organizations that
  intuitively think jointly
• Develop individuals and organizations that
  improvise and adapt to emerging crises
• Achieve unity of effort from a diversity of means

Source 2004 DoD Training Transformation
Implementation Plan (Section 1.0)
5
T2JNTC and JKKDC Capabilities
6
T2JAEC role
Anticipating, Evaluating, and Guiding Development
Illustrative Metrics
JNTC
Strategic Transformation Appraisal
T2 Capabilities
Unit
Joint Operational Concepts
Staff
JAEC
Individual
Training Value
TC AOA
DOTMLP
Barriers
JKDDC
Defense Readiness Reporting System
Strategies and Investments
7
JAEC Tenets

• To achieve Training Transformation objectives
  leading ultimately to training system
  transparency in joint force operations1, then we
  must understand the ways and means necessary to
  reach this future state.
• JAEC provides the analytic rigor to understand,
  assess, measure and report training system
  performance and progress toward achieving
  transparency in joint force operations.
• JAEC assessments will include analyses across the
  joint training continuum to help determine
  optimal means of joint capability sourcing,
  delivery and improvement feedback.
• To properly conduct assessments, we must be able
  to determine measures of merit.
• measures of effectiveness,
• measures of performance.

1) Refer to 2004 DoD Training Transformation
Implementation Plan (Section 1.0)
8
Outline

• JAEC Background
• Performance Assessment Concept
• OSD Balanced Scorecard T2 contribution
• Strategies for the Future

9
Setting Measurable Outcomes for T2

• Focused on COCOM needs
• All Forces Joint Educated and Trained
• New Joint Operation Capabilities
• Dynamic Mission Planning and Rehearsal
• Continuous Readiness Improvements

Ref 2004 DoD Training Transformation
Implementation Plan (Section 1.0)
The Secretary has a saying you can only manage
what you can measure, and thats what JAEC is
all about. Trying to systematically assess,
adapt, be able to revise and understand what
these other capabilities are bringing to bear.
The department has made a tremendous investment
of resources, both dollars and people, and we
want to know, does it make a difference. Dr.
Paul Mayberry, DUSD (Readiness)
10
Performance Assessment Concept

• T2 Vector Assessments
• COCOM Alignment
• Service Alignment
• Force Transformation Alignment

• T2 Integration Assessments
• Policy integration
• Program and process integration
• Information systems integration

• T2 Training Value Assessments
• Joint Educated and Trained Personnel - quantity
• Staffs Unit skill mix
• Responsiveness to COCOM requirements changes

Source 2004 DoD Training Transformation
Implementation Plan (Section 1.0)
11
Outline

• JAEC Background
• Performance Assessment Concept
• OSD Balanced Scorecard T2 contribution
• Strategies for the Future

12
Main Menu
DoD Balanced Scorecard
Force Management Risk
Operational Risk
Institutional Risk
Future Challenges
7BACK Title Slide
Main Menu
13
Training Transformation Balanced Scorecard Concept

• Training Value Assessment
• Level 1
• Initial Measures
• Quantity
• Quality
• Responsiveness

Through the T2 Strategic Plan and Goals and
Implementation Plan tied to the TPG and Strategic
Performance Assessment

• COCOM Satisfaction
• Initial Measures
• Customer satisfaction

• Training Integration Assessment
• Level 2
• Initial Measures
• Policy integration
• Process integration
• Information integration

• Transformation Vector Assessment
• Level 3
• Initial Measures
• COCOM Alignment
• OFT Alignment
• Services Alignment

The Balanced Scorecard for Risk Management is a
central element of the Defense Strategy. It
gives DoD leaders a disciplined way of measuring
near and mid-term defense outputs, in critical
areas, against longer-term strategic Defense
goals. Dr. David Chu, USD(PR)
The T2 Balanced Scorecard
14
Outline

• JAEC Background
• Performance Assessment Concept
• OSD Balanced Scorecard T2 contribution
• Strategies for the Future

15
Transforming the Joint Education Training
Enterprise
Military Service (Suppliers)
COCOMs (Customers)
Information Age Model of Education and Training
Constraints Can Limit Achievement of Goals

JKDDC

• Driven by the Deliberate Planning Cycle
• MPETE requirements poorly understood
• Difficulty aligning supply with demand
• Relatively low throughput efficiency

Use Metrics to align T2 Capabilities
JAEC
JNTC
Military Service (Suppliers)
Industrial Age Model of Education and Training
COCOMs (Customers)

Throughput Efficiency achieved by distributing
production of Jointness across DoD Innovation
Continuous process / readiness improvements
adaptable, agile, and lethal Transparency
Convergence of education, training, mission
planning and rehearsal
Harmonizing MPETE flow around system capacity
MPETE Manpower, Personnel, Education, Training
Experience
Source 2004 DoD Training Transformation
Implementation Plan (Section 1.0)
16
Whats ahead for the JAEC Analysis Support?

• The Industrial Age brought about specialization
  of skills. The Information Age brings about
  specialization of the mind Charles Williams
• How might we apply Fourth-Generation
  Instructional System Design (ISD4) across the
  Education/Training continuum to deliver, more
  optimally, the right forces with the right skill
  mind mix at the right time to meet combatant
  commander needs ?
• Given the current compliance-focused tenet of
  education and training measurement teach what
  you test and test what you teach what other
  type measurement frameworks are available to
  assess performance (readiness) ?
• How might we employ performance-based Standards
  and Conditions (versus compliance-based) across
  the Education/Training continuum to ensure
  quality results are delivered in sufficient
  quantity and when needed ?
• How might we achieve adaptive readiness
  readiness beyond base requirements that serves to
  meet constantly evolving joint warfighting needs ?

17
Questions Discussion