Upload
vuonghuong
View
222
Download
4
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 1
17 September 2007
NNEC Governance &
Mid-Term Plans
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 2
• Overview – What is NNEC?
• Strategic Framework Update
• Governance
• Mid-Term Plans
• Questions & Comments
Outline
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 3
What is IS/NNEC?
• NATO Network Enabled Capability is the
Alliance’s ability to federate the various
components of the operational
environment, from the strategic level
(including NATO HQ) down to the tactical
levels, through a networking and
information infrastructure (NII).
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 4
UAV
Ground
Station
Access to informationAccess to information
Remote
Calculation
Air coordination centre
Tactical Sensor
Remote HQ
Image
Interpretation
system
Sensor
Air effectors
X
XX
CollaborationCollaboration
Coordination &
Fusion centre
Information SharingInformation Sharing
Data transportData transport
Info assurance Info assurance
HQ
NNEC in Action
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 5
Development of otherDevelopment of other
Transformation Objective AreasTransformation Objective Areas
NEC National InitiativesNEC National Initiatives
and Coordinationand Coordination• NNEC Foundation
Document
• MCM-0038-2005
• Comprehensive
Political Guidance
NNEC Strategic Framework
NNEC Strategic Framework
Vision and Concept
Architecture
Management Approach
Roadmap
Detailed Plan(s)
• NNEC Feasibility
Study
• Programs of Work
• Commercial world
• Transformation
Objective Areas
inputs
2005 2006 2007
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 6
Leadership
and
Guidance
Architecture &
Service Def. &
Specification
Operational
Concepts and
Requirements
Implications
Implementation
Coherence Areas
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 7
• Provide NNEC input to concept development.
• Establish an operational maturity model.
• Propose operational maturity level targets.
• Prioritize operational service requirements.
• Coordinate NNEC-related needs for operational
experimentation.
• Recommend operational improvements.
Operational Concepts and
Requirements Implications
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 8
• Develop and agree NATO Service Oriented
Architectures (SOAs).
• Develop and agree service definitions.
• Establish a services maturity model.
Architecture and Service
Definition & Specification
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 9
• Establish the forecast of services availability.
• Perform services availability gap analyses.
• Recommend programmatic changes.
• Recommend improvements to the capability
planning process.
• Coordinate test and evaluation activities.
Implementation
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 10
• Support NNEC governance.
• Provision of coordination body resources.
• Establish coordination mechanisms with non-
NATO bodies.
• Establish and recommend coherent NNEC-
related policies.
• Agree NNEC level of ambition (LoA).
• Development of plans.
• Development of awareness and education.
Leadership and Guidance
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 11
Coordination Body
4 Coherence Areas
Nations NATO Industry
Contributors
L&G
NNEC Gov Body
Decision Bodies
NC3B
Cross-
coordination
Governance
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 12
Operational Needs
Operational
Needs
Operational
Needs
NNEC - What has to be
governed ?
NNEC
Governance
NATO
NEC NATO
Nations
NEC
OTHER
NEC
Capabilities
Capabilities
Capabilities Capabilities
Capabilities
CapabilitiesCapabilities
Capabilities
Capabilities
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 13
Why – Planning Disciplines
• Need a mechanism to coordinate
realization activities across the various
planning disciplines
– Force Planning
– Armaments Planning
– Resource Planning
• Senior Resource Board
• MBC
– C2 Planning
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 14
Capability Master Plan (CMP)
Capability Area
Improvement Programs (CAIPs)
Capability
Architecture
CAFJO
Strategic
Guidance
CPG
TOA
Transformation
Goals
TOA TOA TOA TOA TOA TOA
Cap Cap Cap Cap ProgrammingLevel
Concept
Development
Projects
Experimentation
Projects
Research Technology
Projects
Capability Packages
Projects
TrainingProjects
Capability Area
Plans (CAP)
PlanningLevel
Capability Development
Process – Overview
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 15
Why - Planning Coherence
FPsFPs R&DR&DCPsCPs Pol &Pol &
StdsStdsExpExp Bottom-up DevelopmentBottom-up Development
& Implementation & Implementation
Top-down DirectionTop-down Direction
MTPMTP MTPMTP Coherence between Coherence between
Top-down and Bottom-upTop-down and Bottom-upMTPMTP
Need a mechanism to coordinate C3 related activities across force planning,Need a mechanism to coordinate C3 related activities across force planning,
armaments planning, C2 planning, resource planningarmaments planning, C2 planning, resource planning
OtherOther
TOASTOAS
NNECNNEC
SFSF
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 16
NNEC Related C3 MTPs
• Predominantly Bottom-up
– No means to define meaningful objectives from top-downdirection (NNEC SF, Overarching Capability Architecture)
– Services not yet defined
– Architecture products not yet delivered
– No means to measure progress – NML work in progress
– Bottom-up provides a real world starting point
• NNEC FS and Architecture Framework used as the foundation
• Compliance with C3 Capability Management Directive
• Remain consistent with ACT’s proposed Capability DevelopmentProcess
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 17
Time Dimension
Mid TermMid Term
Near TermNear Term
MTPs
Meet specific nearMeet specific near
term objectivesterm objectives
Ensure mid-termEnsure mid-term
coherencecoherence
Longer TermLonger Term
Driven by ourDriven by our
longer termlonger term
NNEC SFNNEC SF
VisionVision
3-6 yr3-6 yr
1-2 yr1-2 yr
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 18
• NNEC related C3 Mid-Term Plans intended to be 5-6
year ‘roadmaps’ for coordinating development and
implementation (“mid-term plans”) efforts
– Output focused - enhancing mission effectiveness
– ‘Common sense’ groupings of related tasks
– Realistic level of ambition for coherence
• A management & coherency tool intended to
encompass:
– Changes to existing projects
– Introduction of new projects
– NATO and national contributions
NNEC Related C3 MTPs
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 19
• NNEC-related C3 Mid-Term Plans intended to:– be limited to C3 part of NNEC
– be catalyst to transition:• from system centric to a Service Oriented Approach,
• how programs will deliver capabilities/services.
• Need to focus on:– Delivery of defined capability/service components
through:• existing programs (Bi-SC AIS, Comms, ACCS…),
• force proposals (interaction with Nations)
• other activities ( Experimentation, R&D, ConceptDevelopment, interaction with Industry, COEs, …)
NNEC Related C3 MTPs
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 20
Proposed Initial Set of NNEC
Related C3 MTPs
• Common COIServices
• COI Services
– Land C2
– Maritime C2
– Air C2
– Logistics C2
– Spec Forces C2
– CBRN C2
– Intel C2
• Core Enterprise Services
• Communication Services
• Service Management &
Control
• Information Assurance
• Interoperability
Standardization
• Architecture Roadmap
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 21
Where We Are
• Proposed Mid-Term Plans are fully consistent with theNNEC FS and NNEC Architecture compendium (NNECSF)– However, need to define scope & objectives,
interdependencies, priority
• C3 community agreed with ACT approach & initial setof plans:– C3 COI endorsed approach (Mar 2007).
– Agreed to set up C3 COI tiger teams to identify MTPs of near-term priority interest (July 2007).
• NC3B and Nations through its Sub-Committees (SC1 /C3C working group) and others….
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 22
• Align next DRR cycle focus areas with MTPs.
• Assess interdependencies and update MTPs.– Interdependencies within each MTP
– Interdependencies among / across the MTPs
• Ensure service-centric approach is reflected in all MTPs.– Bottom-up approach in some MTPs is still too system-centric
• Increase participation of the operational community(e.g., update existing CONOPs and/or ensure futureCONOPs reflect NNEC approach).
• Link with Top-Down guidance:– NNEC Strategic framework (Detailed Plan)
– C3 MTPs /CAIPS with Capability Architecture, as emerges
Way Ahead
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 23
• Define for each plan objectives, milestones, coreactivities, and interdependencies:– Prerequisite : defining scope and objectives based on
architecture products ( # NMLs, Service definitions, Interfaceprofiles)
• Architecture & Standardization MTPs support all otherplans (need to coordinate and harmonize)
• Define minimum criteria to initiate/prioritize plans
• Ideally: All plans should be developed in parallel, butdue to resource limitations, …..
• Prioritisation based on objectives and scope and projects withineach plan, interdependencies between capabilities/servicecomponents (comms /core...)
• Focus on 3-4 priority plans : 1 COI service (Land or Joint C2 ),Core services and sub-set of Communications Services, IAservices ? to demonstrate value and keep momentum,
Way Ahead
NATO UNCLASSIFIED
NATO/EAPC UNCLASSIFIED 24
Questions?