Strategic Analysis of the NNEC Roadmap

Document Sample
Strategic Analysis of the NNEC Roadmap Powered By Docstoc
					              NATO UNCLASSIFIED




NATO Network-Centric Enabled Capability (NNEC)


    Strategic Analysis of the NNEC Roadmap




         ACT IS/NNEC Integrated Capability Team



                        Draft 0.1

                     October 2009



     Interim Document Reference: ACT-NNEC-RM-005/01




              NATO UNCLASSIFIED
                                        NATO UNCLASSIFIED




                                           TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.- Background.................................................................................................................3
2.- Aim and Scope ...........................................................................................................3
3.- Purpose of Analysis Using the NNEC Roadmap Toolset ............................................3
4.- The Roadmap Data Extraction Process and Tools .....................................................5
5.- Case Example: ......................................................................................................... 10
6.- Conclusions and Recommendations of the
    Strategic Analysis of the NNEC Roadmap ................................................................ 17

ANNEX A: References ................................................................................................... 23
ANNEX B: Pre-built Filter Queries ................................................................................. 24
ANNEX C: Process Example Detailed Discussion ......................................................... 27
ANNEX D: Acronyms ..................................................................................................... 35




                                        NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                                             Page 2
                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED




               Strategic Analysis of the NNEC Roadmap

1.- Background

The purpose of the NNEC Roadmap its framework, and related topics including
Milestones, Focus Areas, Objectives and Enablers, are described in the NATO Network
Centric Enabled Capability (NNEC) Introduction to the NNEC Roadmap [ACT RM02,
2009]. This document is intended as a companion to that document, describing an
analysis process to exploit the NNEC Roadmap for the purpose of NNEC Governance.
The process described herein will provide predictable and repeatable analytical results
that can be used in conjunction with other information as a primary NNEC Governance
tool.


2.- Aim and Scope

The aim of this document is to expand the description of the Roadmap from its structure
and purpose to include an explanation of the filters and mechanisms required to parse
the data and derive reports and conclusions. A case example using the process
described will be presented to demonstrate the methodology for generating actionable
courses of action and recommendations for NNEC Governance.

The NNEC Roadmap is still under development. Although the primary framework is in
hand, validation of many details are ongoing. This extends to the operational Milestones
and Objectives, the Focus Area descriptions, and population and validation of enablers.

It is within the scope of this document to present an analysis process and provide an
example of its application to generate inputs to support NNEC Governance.

It is not within the scope of this document to provide analysis on any enabler or
capability that is not directly related to NNEC; to provide detailed discussions of plans or
programs behind the case example; to provide detailed analysis or discussion on NATO
policy, funding, or other related issues; or to convey decisions from or for NNEC
Governance.


3.- Purpose of Analysis Using the NNEC Roadmap Toolset

Governance of program management activities focuses on identifying and specifying
requirements; establishing and managing a strong portfolio of projects that support
those requirements; implementing and supporting the resulting products of those
projects; and continuously monitoring the results of product implementations.



                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                        Page 3
                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED

The NNEC Roadmap is designed to support NNEC Governance - the management of a
portfolio of projects that support the achievement of increased operational capabilities
over time by implementing network enabled capabilities. Analysis using the NNEC
Roadmap will enable identification of programmatic gaps and overlaps and will lead to
identification of additional actions that must be performed to achieve these higher levels
of operational capability. The analysis process consists of conducting a focused study
on a specific programmatic issue to identify required actions and enablers, critical
development paths, scheduling options, risks, gap analysis, and resourcing issues. This
work will result in a set of actionable recommendations in such areas as prioritization
and scheduling changes, funding decisions, and changes in levels of ambition. The
relationship between the Roadmap analysis process is depicted in Figure 1.




                            Figure 1: The Analysis Loop




                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                      Page 4
                                    NATO UNCLASSIFIED


4.- The Roadmap Data Extraction Process and Tools

The true benefit of the Roadmap materializes when it is used to analyze and govern the
encompassed activities ensuring objectives are met on time and in the most efficient
manner possible. The analysis process starts with a series of questions to focus the
analysis and formulate a plan. From this plan, the roadmap can be queried and
manipulated to extract meaningful information from which to identify risks and
recommendations. This analysis process is represented in Figure 2.




                                                                   NNEC Roadmap




      Feasibility Questions

      Coherence Questions
                                                                  Identify Objectives
                               Formulate Analysis   Analysis
     Scheduling Questions                                           and Enablers of
                                     Plan            Plan
                                                                        Interest
    Implementation Questions

      Resource Questions




                                                                   Identify Linked
                                                                      Threads




                                              Identify Critical
                                                                                        Identify Planning
                                             Paths Supporting
                                                                                              Gaps
                                                Objectives




                                                                    Identify Risks




                                                                                                      Reprioritization
                                                                      Develop                          Rescheduling
                                                                  Recommendaitons
                                                                                                   Funding Decision

                                                                                                      LoA Changes

                                                                                               CP, MTP, CUR etc Revisions

                                                                                               Other Recommendations




                                  Figure 2: The Analysis Process



                                    NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                                                       Page 5
                                   NATO UNCLASSIFIED

                       The analysis steps describing this process are detailed in
Table 1


          Action                              Description                                Inputs/Outputs
                                                                                       Feasibility Questions

                               Identify a set of objectives for analysis               Coherence Questions
 Formulate Analysis Plan      and prepare a plan for systematic analysis               Scheduling Questions
                                         using the Roadmap                          Implementation Questions
                                                                                       Resource Questions
                                Objectives and Enablers of interest are
 Identify Objectives and
                              identified based on the scope and focus of                   Analysis Plan
   Enablers of interest
                                    the specific analysis questions
                                Trace analysis is performed on selected
                               Objectives and enablers to identify links
                                                                              Objectives and Enablers of interest and
 Identify Linked Threads         and dependencies within and between
                                                                                           related data
                                 programs at the Alliance and National
                                                  levels
                                  Analysis is performed on identified
                                                                                  Linked threads of enablers and
 Identify Planning Gaps         threads to determine if current plans are
                                                                              objectives supporting the analysis goals
                                        sufficient and supported.
                                 Critical path analysis is performed on
  Identify Critical Paths         selected threads to determine which             Linked threads of enablers and
  Supporting Objectives          enablers and objectives are driving the      objectives supporting the analysis goals
                                  implementation schedules and why
                               Identified plan gaps, critical path results,
                               resource and operational constraints, and
      Identify Risks              sensitivity analysis are evaluated to           All results of analysis process
                               develop a risk profile for achievement of
                                    the objectives under evaluation
                                                                                         Reprioritizations
                                  Recommendations for action are                           Rescheduling
                                compiled for NNEC Governance and                         Funding Changes
        Develop
                                plans are developed for updating and
    Recommendations                                                                     LoA Changes
                                improving the Roadmap for the next
                                           analysis phase                         CP, MTP, CUR etc Revisions
                                                                                     Other Recommendations

                               Table 1: Analysis Step Descriptions




Table 2, previously described in [ACT RM02, 2009], shows some of the analysis
threads that can be extracted from the NNEC Roadmap given a number of possible
analysis activities.




                                   NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                                           Page 6
                                               NATO UNCLASSIFIED

                 Desired analysis to be supported or              Analysis that can currently be done using the NNEC
                 performed using the NNEC Roadmap                                      Roadmap
                                                                 This can be done now for activities. There are currently no
              Identifying mismatches between NNEC
                                                                 direct links in the Roadmap to resources, so the resource and
              milestone objectives, associated activities, plans
                                                                 solution analysis will have to be done using the Roadmap data
              and available resources, and potential solutions;
                                                                 in conjunction with other information
                                                                 This can be accomplished using the current Roadmap and its
              Providing guidance for NATO-Nations’
                                                                 usefulness for this purpose will expand as the data is more
              evolutionary synchronization;
                                                                 complete and focused
                                                                 This can be accomplished using the current Roadmap but it will
                                                                 require closer working relationship with the Implementation
              Synchronizing ACT and ACO activities
                                                                 CA to ensure the required data is properly entered and
                                                                 validated
                                                                 A focused analysis of the Roadmap could currently yield
                                                                 information that can be used to derive or reinforce
              Deriving inputs for Capability Improvement
                                                                 development of Capability Improvement Plans and Force
              Plans and Force Proposals
                                                                 Proposals. This capability will improve as the data in the
                                                                 roadmap is improved and fine-tuned
              Capturing inputs from the NATO Defence             This can be done using the current Roadmap structure - actual
              Planning Process (NDPP), capability shortfalls data input depends on a robust data collection and validation
              and current levels of ambition;                    strategy to be determined
                                                                 This can be supported via a reachability analysis of the
                                                                 milestones and milestone objectives - the current database
              Adjusting Levels of Ambition;                      must be validated and dependencies between Enablers and
                                                                 objectives must be more robust and complete before this
                                                                 analysis can be relied upon
                                                                 Resources are not currently part of the Roadmap sturucture.
                                                                 This task could be accomplished by an analyst using the
              Resource allocation and prioritization analysis
                                                                 Roadmap as one of several tools - the Roadmap does not have
                                                                 the capability by itself to support this requirement

                        Table 2: Analysis Products and Abilities (from ACT RM02, 2009])


Filter tags have been developed for the roadmap to allow for parsing items based on Enabler Categories, Focus Areas,
 pertinent Milestones, relevant Mid Term Plans, Capability Packages, Force Goals and Proposals, and several other
     criteria. All items and intermediate milestone actions are tagged and can be parsed based on compound filter
constructs using pre-set filters or custom filters as required. Tracing and special selection tools were added to provide
the ability to identify all predecessors and successors to a specific item, and all filters can be used in conjunction with
                  the trace and special selection tools to fine tune the analysis. The Filter tags, shown in
        Table 3, can be used to filter the roadmap and create reports for analysis and
        presentation.


                 Filter Tag                                 Definition
                MSA                 Milestone Action and Number
                DOTMLPFI            DOTMLPFI Tag
                Map                 Mapped directly from original MTP plan
                D&P                 Doctrine and Policy Enabler
                Prss                Process Enabler
                Info                Information Enabler
                Asst                Asset Enabler
                Imp                 Implementation Enabler
                Enbl                NNEC Enabler


                                               NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                                           Page 7
                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED

       Filter Tag                            Definition
      MileS         Milestone Number
      Org           Organization Focus Area
      MA            Mission Analysis Focus Area
      JISR          Joint Intelligence Surveillance Reconnaissance Focus Area
      TF            Targeting and Fire Support Focus Area
      BM            Battlespace Management Focus Area
      C2            Command and Control Focus Area
      FP            Force Protection Focus Area
      SL            Logistics Focus Area
      Gen           General Category
      MTPn          Relevant Mid Term Plan for Item, where n = 1 through 6
      Crit          Item is critical for accomplishment of milestone - Yes/No
      CP            Capability Package – dropdown list box to tag item to
                    supported capability package
      Fproposal     Force Proposal/Goal supported by Enabler
      MSO           Marks items that are Milestone Objectives

                                 Table 3: Filter Tags



A summary of the primary tags available for every enabler and objective in the
Roadmap is contained in the “Task Summary” dialog box, shown in
Figure 3. The tags can be applied in the analysis via the use of filters for parsing and
viewing items of interest within the Roadmap. A number of these filter tag queries have
been pre-built to support this capability to rapidly filter for high interest views. Many of
these pre-built filter tag queries are shown in ANNEX B: Pre-built Filter Queries.




                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                        Page 8
   NATO UNCLASSIFIED




Figure 3: Task Summary Dialog Box




   NATO UNCLASSIFIED                Page 9
                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED


5.- Case Example of the NNEC Roadmap Strategic Analysis

5.1 Introduction

5.1.1 Purpose

This case example is provided to illustrate an application of the analysis process and
show a glimpse into decision support product types that can be generated using the
Roadmap toolset to support NNEC governance activities. A more focused set of
analysis questions can be performed as the Roadmap dataset becomes more robust.

5.1.2 Case Example Description

This analysis example is focused on the achievement of NNEC Milestone 1, Information
Sharing, for a NATO Deployed Forces Capability. NNEC Milestone 1 is described in
terms of operational improvements in [ACT RM02, 2009]. The milestones do not infer
that the goals will be fully met in every aspect in every part of the Alliance. Rather, the
goal capabilities will be common and predominate across the Alliance by the target
date. The specific focus for this analysis was on the Deployable Forces portion of the
Milestone:

       Deployable forces will reach Full Operating Capability using both collaboration
       tools and reach-back between the Main and Forward Elements. Other superior
       and subordinate units will be aware of reach-back capabilities and opportunities.
       Mission analysis will involve multi-source and multi- discipline information
       characterized by frequent personal interaction/collaboration among all
       stakeholders, which should lead to the development of a common intent. At this
       stage, military personnel will use collaboration tools to conduct collaborative
       analysis and conduct cross functional (multi-disciplinary) war gaming (inclusion of
       the inter-agency component will occur at Milestone Two).

5.1.3 Limitations

The case study is focused on a broad topic and draws generalized conclusions due to
the limitations of the current dataset. The current Roadmap development effort has
been focused on proof of principle. For this and other practical reasons, data population
has been concentrated on Milestone 1. Milestones 2, 3 and 4 have not yet been
developed past preliminary stages. Validation and refinement of Milestones, Milestone
Objectives, Enablers, schedules, dependencies, and constraints have just begun. The
Roadmap was started using a collection of documents and programmatic descriptions.
The current work must now be systematically tested and improved via a series of
working groups and the establishment of formal Communities of Interest coordinated
through the NNEC Coherence Area Leaders.




                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                      Page 10
                                                               NATO UNCLASSIFIED

        5.2 Objectives

        5.2.1 Questions addressed in the Case Example

                    Can Milestone 1 be reached by the goal date of 2012?
                    What are the critical Objectives required to reach Milestone 1?
                    What are the high-impact cross-functional threads of development that are
                     required to achieve Milestone 1?
                    What are the critical Implementation and NNEC Coherence Issues to achieve
                     Milestone 1?
                    What major gaps and planning issues can be highlighted given the current data
                     in the Roadmap?

        5.3 Analysis

        5.3.1 Process

The process shown in Figure 2 was used to perform the case example analysis. For each step, specific filters and tools
                                           were applied as described in
        Table 4. It summarizes some of the analysis related to Objectives and Enablers. A more
        detailed discussion of the analysis process is included in ANNEX C: Process Example
        Detailed Discussion.

                    Step                        Items of Interest                                  Methodology                             Tools Applied                         Output
                                      What are the critical Objectives required to
                                                reach Milestone (MS) 1?
                                       What are the high-impact cross-functional
                                      threads of development that are required to
        Formulate Analysis Questions                 achieve MS 1?                                                                                                        Focus questions to steer
                                                                                                   Operational Analysis                              N/A
                   (Plan)              What are the critical Implementation and                                                                                                  analysis
                                          Coherence Issues to achieve MS 1?
                                     What major gaps and planning issues can be
                                        highlighted given the current data in the
                                                       Roadmap?
                                                                                                                                                                          Groupings of Objectives
                                                                                                                                                                          and Enablers focused on
                                       Inspection with support from tools to narrow     Operational and Technical analysis; use of                                            specific types of
           Identify Objectives and                                                                                                      Trace Macro, Filters for single
                                        down objectives and enablers of interest for   roadmap tools to perform trace analysis and                                        enablers to help identify
             Enablers of interest                                                                                                        and multiple enabler types,
                                        further study based on Analysis Questions                     filtered views                                                       those with high impact
                                                                                                                                                                             and those that may
                                                                                                                                                                           require additional detail

                                                                                                                                     Trace macro applied to "Develop List of all Objectives and
                                                                                       Use roadmap tools to identify objectives and   Deployable Forces Capability"        Enablers Linked to
                                      Highlight Objectives and Enablers necessary
           Identify Linked Threads                                                      enablers linked to Objective "Deployable    with "Driving Tasks" not selected,    "Deployable Forces
                                           for focus area "Deployable Forces"
                                                                                                    Forces Capability"              use of other filters to focus thread   Capability", can be
                                                                                                                                       on specific types of enablers     parsed by enabler type

                                      Inspection with supporting tools to determine       Currently a manual process using the
                                                                                                                                                                      Discussion of planning
           Identify Planning Gaps        scheduling conflicts, gaps, and missing        standard scheduling tools available in the    Standard PM scheduling tools
                                                                                                                                                                      and scheduling issues
                                                       information                          Roadmap's software environment
                                                                                       Use roadmap tools to identify objectives and Trace Macro applied to Milestone List of all Objectives and
           Identify Critical Paths       Identify Objectives and Enablers on the
                                                                                         enablers on the critical path, based on       1 item with "Driving Tasks"   Enablers on the Critical
           Supporting Objectives                      "Critical path"
                                                                                           schedule lag time, supporting MS 1                   selected                    path for MS1

                                                                                       Currently a manual process using all available
                                         Review of all analysis output products to                                                                                          Risk analysis and
                 Identify Risks                                                          information and additional subject matter            All available tools
                                          determine risks and mitigation plans                                                                                             mitigation alternatives
                                                                                          expertise from multiple coherence areas

                                                                                       Currently a manual process using all available                                      Recommendations for
                                       Review of all analysis output products, risk
         Develop Recommendations                                                         information and additional subject matter         All available information        achieving identified
                                             analysis and mitigation plans
                                                                                          expertise from multiple coherence areas                                               objectives



                                          Table 4: Example Application of Analysis Process*
                                                                          *color coded to Figure 2



                                                               NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                                                                               Page 11
NATO UNCLASSIFIED




NATO UNCLASSIFIED   Page 12
                                          NATO UNCLASSIFIED

        5.3.2 Objective Related Results

  The critical path analysis is preliminary due to partial completion of linking between enablers and objectives and
validation of scheduling inputs. However, based on an initial analysis of the Roadmap, the following Objectives are on
               the critical path to reach Milestone 1 (based on limited lag time of scheduled completion) -
        Figure 4 shows a GANTT Chart of the this critical path:

               Organization Milestone 1 Objectives
                    Reach back / Distributed Operations Functional Element
                    Training Process for distributed operations using NNEC
                    Information Standards to Support Distributed Operations

               Mission Analysis Milestone 1 Objectives
                    Synchronized Mission Analysis / Comprehensive Approach Structure

               Force Protection Milestone 1 Objectives
                    Common Information Assurance Strategy and Policy
                    NII Security Management Processes and Services
                    Common Information Assurance Services for Directory, Discovery,
                      Messaging, and Situational Awareness

               Common Milestone 1 Objectives
                   Information Sharing Doctrine and Policy and Synchronize Across
                    Concepts
                   Change Processes to Allow for Posting Before Processing, Aggregation
                    and De-aggregation of Information
                   Flexible Information Requirements to Enable Information Sharing Across
                    Missions and Functions
                   NATO Data and Information Management Plans for Sharing Information
                    Across Missions and Functions
                   Expand Use of Common Distributed Collaboration Tools Across
                    Functional Areas
                   Synchronize Reach back / Distributed Operations Concepts with
                    Communications Assets

        5.3.3 Enabler Related Results

        The Enablers Critical (based on limited lag time) to achieving the overall Milestone 1
        goal of information Sharing are:

               Doctrine and Policy Enablers:
                   Synchronize DJSE SOPs with Knowledge Development (KD) and Intel
                   Establish ISR Data Sharing Agreements Beyond MAJIIC Nations
                   Update JISR Information Release Policy in Line with NNEC Principles
                   Develop Information Assurance Policies for Information Sharing with Non-
                       Military Entities
                   Develop JISR Common Data Strategy and Coordinated Collection

                                          NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                                 Page 13
                       NATO UNCLASSIFIED

          Develop Cyber Defence Policy

   Process Enablers:
        Develop CDIS Processes to Enable Information Sharing Among NATO
          and Nations for Common Threats
        Develop Non-Military Liaison Procedures for Collaboration on
          Comprehensive Approach
        Develop Collaboration Processes and Synchronize Across Concepts
        Develop Processes for Information Sharing with Non-Military Entities
        Develop and Provide Training for Collaborative Tools
        Develop and Provide Training for Collaborative Processes

   Information Enablers
         Establish Order of Battle Information Requirements
         Develop Collaboration Information Requirements and Synchronize Across
          Concepts
         Develop Joint Situational Awareness Capability Information Requirements

   Asset Enablers
        Develop CDIS Services (one-to-one and one-to-several)
        Collaboration Tools Increment 2
        Develop Collaboration Services
        Develop Information Exchange Gateway for NATO Secret to Mission
          Secret network (IEG C)
        Develop, Upgrade, Integrate and Deploy DCIS Fly out Boxes to Support
          DJSE/NRF/ISAF Deployments
        DCIS + LINC + LINCE FOC

   Implementation Enablers
        Build NNEC CES Test bed
        Build NNEC Test and Evaluation Facility
        Integrate Core Collaborative Services
        Develop Imagery Dissemination Standards
        CSD STANAG 4559 (Standard Image Library Interface?)

   NNEC Enablers
       Publish NNEC Data Strategy
       Develop NATO Metadata Registry and Repository (NMRR) Specifications




                       NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                 Page 14
  NATO UNCLASSIFIED




Figure 4: Milestone 1 Critical Path


  NATO UNCLASSIFIED                   Page 15
                           NATO UNCLASSIFIED


5.3.4 Cross-Functional Analysis Results

A series of queries to define several high impact development threads were performed.
Three specific cross-functional threads of development were extracted that have a high
impact on multiple individual development efforts that support the Milestone 1
operational goals. Those threads are summarized as follows:

      Synchronization of processes and information requirements between concepts is
       a repeated requirement in the roadmap. Processes supporting knowledge
       development and management, leading to a Coherent Approach to effects based
       planning and execution, must be established and should be synchronized across
       all concept development pathways to achieve the Information Sharing goal;

      Development and implementation of a force-wide collaboration capability is the
       largest value added NNEC capability for achieving the Information Sharing goal.
       Development and implementation of services supporting collaboration and
       information sharing are required to support a robust collaboration capability;

      Development of a comprehensive approach for engagement planning and
       execution that is synchronized across all concepts and implementations. NNEC
       capabilities are critical to support the implementation of a comprehensive
       approach for effects based planning and execution, and this process underpins
       the deployed force operational approach using reach back capabilities. This
       thread is supported by a robust collaboration capability as well;




                           NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                  Page 16
                           NATO UNCLASSIFIED


6.- Conclusions and Recommendations of the Strategic Analysis of the NNEC
Roadmap

This document has described the results of the work performed over the last half year in
the area of data mining, strategic analysis and governance recommendations
generation out of the existing edition of the NNEC Roadmap. The work, although still
unfinished, allows to derive a number of conclusions and recommendations that might
be used both to steer future work in the roadmap development and analysis, and to
derive actions needed to ensure that NNEC will be correctly implemented.

To address both areas above, this section compiles the derived conclusions and
recommendations and groups them in two different sections. Section 6.1 gathers the
conclusions and recommendations related to the strategic analysis of the roadmap
process, while section 6.2 focuses on the outcomes of the first round of strategic
analysis, to derive practical, timely programmatic inputs for NNEC governance to start
taking decisions based on the roadmap analysis results. The second part, although
obviously incomplete due to the still on-going roadmap population, allows to start
providing systematic inputs to the NNEC Governance bodies and Coherence Areas to
facilitate immediate adoption of early NNEC (programmatic) results.


6.1 General conclusions and recommendations

The primary conclusions related to the NNEC Roadmap strategic analysis process
are as follows:

   1. The early results from the first strategic analysis of the NNEC roadmap are
      extremely positive and encouraging. Reasonable and practical results have been
      obtained, both at NNEC governance level and for daily management of NNEC
      teams activities.

   2. The analysis process, as described in section 4 of this document, has proven to
      be consistent, flexible, repeatable and, to some extent, candidate for automation.
      In particular,

          a. It has proven valid to incorporate and make use of information from both
             the operational and the programmatic world.
          b. It addresses a broad number of NNEC-related programmatic questions,
             and has proven to be flexible enough to incorporate many more.

   3. The selection of Microsoft project as the tool to implement the roadmap
      framework has proven to be adequate. The tool has shown to be of very good
      value to implement the required analysis mechanisms to facilitate data mining,
      data extraction and data reporting.



                           NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                    Page 17
                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED

   4. The selection of current NNEC milestones (information sharing, federated
      processes and support tools), NNEC focus areas and NNEC components
      (doctrine and policy, processes, information and assets) has demonstrated as a
      very useful and practical way ahead to decompose the analytical problem and
      facilitate the analysis. Reusing other existing concepts and terminology used for
      other valid purposes (like the current NNEC dimensions, Essential Operational
      Capabilities or Communities of Interest, to name a few), while essentially doable,
      would have made the analysis process unnecessarily complex and would have
      put at risk the reliability of the analysis results.

Once said the above, the following additional conclusions also need to be considered:

   5. While this first run of the strategic analysis has proven the sanity and the
      important added value of the results, these early outputs need to be taken with
      the precaution of information associated to an still under-development tool. It will
      necessarily take one or two more iterations of the analysis to reach a level of
      confidence that allows declaring the roadmap (and, in particular, its analysis) as
      a fully mature capability.

   6. In particular, it should be mentioned that while current NNEC milestones and
      associated objectives are considered sufficiently mature (small changes are still
      being implemented), the enablers and associated scheduling still requires a
      significant level of effort to be completed. At the moment, current data in the
      roadmap has been captured by the ACT NNEC Core Team, with the support of
      the NNEC Coherence Areas (particularly OCRI), and inputs from the users
      domain through the organization of a specific, tailored-to-purpose workshop. This
      approach needs to be generalized with the support of the NNEC Governance
      authorities to capture and validate all the remaining information.

   7. The analysis of the information in the roadmap involves data mining, extraction,
      processing and reporting. These activities can be automated and implemented
      into the framework tool to some extent. but it should not be forgotten that the
      analysis demands, in addition to the above, a significant amount of expert
      analysis that can only be conducted by the adequate personnel.

Based on the above, the following recommendations can be done:

   8. Participation of Communities of Interest. The quality of the roadmap analysis
      results heavily depend on the amount and reliability of information obtained from
      the different Communities of Interest (CoI). NNEC Governance authorities should
      encourage and assist the different CoI in participating in the activities required to
      populate the NNEC roadmap with area of interest specific-enablers and
      associated metadata (scheduling and programmatic). The spectrum of involved
      CoIs should embrace the user communities, but also programmatic and funding
      bodies as well.



                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                     Page 18
                         NATO UNCLASSIFIED

9. Participation of Nations. Nations should consider and involve themselves as full-
   first-line stakeholder in both the NNEC roadmap population and analysis
   processes. Without nations‟ contributions, the roadmap will solely reflect NATO
   level of ambition and capability development status in terms of net centricity, and
   will be agnostic in terms of National plans and (NNEC) impact of national
   participation in NATO-led missions.

10. Identification of actually required analysis outputs. The current analysis process
    produces a vast number of results that are considered both valid and useful.
    Nonetheless, the participation and contribution of the main stakeholders (e.g.,
    L&G support group and CAs) in the delineation of the final functionality of the
    analysis process would guarantee that only those results that are both practical
    and required are effectively generated.

11. Level of Ambition. The currently available roadmap tool and the associated
    analysis process are already sufficiently complex and resource demanding.
    While it might be tempting to request additional functionality or expand the
    already broad scope of the tool, that might not be advisable. Increasing (for
    example) the level of granularity of the enablers or attempting to do resource
    management using the tool might put at risk the effort, demanding huge
    unavailable resources, complicating the process beyond affordability, intruding
    capability development management responsibilities or yielding incomplete or
    inconsistent results, among others.

12. Periodicity and Frequency of the Analysis. The tool as described, along with the
    analysis process, allow systematic and repeatable analysis cycles. While two or
    more cycles per year could be executed, it is recommended to limit the full
    strategic analysis of the NNEC roadmap to once per calendar year, plus a
    number of intermediate sectional analysis done in support of specific needs (like
    L&G SG specific timely requirements or other exceptional NNEC community
    needs). This recommendation is based on the perceived duration of the
    information update from the different communities, and the effort associated to
    do the above. Higher frequency on the analysis process might imply that most
    resources are devoted to the analysis itself, and insufficient effort is allocated to
    update the data contained in the Roadmap.

13. Process endorsement. Finally, it is recommended that NATO authorities analyse,
    comment and, if adequate, validate the process herein describe, and that invite
    ACT to continue with the effort to populate the roadmap, to automate the analysis
    process to the extent possible, and to do regular strategic analysis of the
    contents along with timely ad-hoc specific analysis in support of daily needs.




                         NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                      Page 19
                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED

6.2 October 2009 Edition Conclusions and Recommendations

The previous section highlighted the general conclusions and recommendations derived
from the sanity check performed on the NNEC Roadmap strategic analysis report. At
the same time, that sanity check (or first run of the analysis itself) has derived a number
of outputs. Many of those outputs are considered to be valid and useful inputs for NNEC
governance purposes. While the results of the analysis are still incomplete based on the
limited level of roadmap population, those results that have been obtained can be
immediately use to drive and speed up NNEC realization activities.

The main conclusions and recommendations of the October 2009 NNEC Roadmap
strategic analysis, that could be of use for governance purposes, are summarized
hereafter:

   1. The October 2009 analysis cycle has been successfully completed in accordance
      with the process described in section 4 of this document. The sanity check has
      been considered successful as well and no significant flaws in the process or the
      tools have been found. Therefore, the recommendations herein presented are
      considered as reliable.

   2. The main issue of concern at the moment is the limited amount of enablers that
      populate the roadmap, and the very limited amount of currently inserted
      scheduling and programmatic information. This does only obey to the fact that
      most effort last year has been spent in developing the roadmap framework and
      associated processes (including analysis), and less on population of the actual
      enablers. This situation should be corrected during the next iteration cycle of the
      roadmap, with adequate involvement from both roadmap custodians and
      adequate communities of interest. In the meantime, results are only partial,
      although still valid.

   3. The October 2009 strategic analysis of the NNEC Roadmap shows that
      milestone #1 is achievable in terms of the identified objectives, which are
      coherent and consistent. Current data analysis shows that, unless corrective
      measures are applied, milestone 1 can be achieved by no earlier than March
      2013, due to the current scheduling of core services development plans. This
      date might still be pushed further ahead by other enablers not yet inserted or
      properly scheduled into the roadmap.

   4. The main areas of concern to achieve Milestone 1 operational benefits can be
      summarized as follows:

          a. Force-wide collaboration capability is the largest value-added NNEC
             capability for achieving information sharing goals and benefits.

          b. Successfully implementing the above requires simultaneous work on the
             synchronization of processes and information requirements across all
             (existing and under development) NATO and National concepts.

                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                      Page 20
                        NATO UNCLASSIFIED


      c. Successfully executing the above requires, in addition, a single
         comprehensive approach to synchronize mission engagement, planning
         and execution.

5. In practical terms the above concerns can be translated into the need to develop
   mission-wide collaboration capabilities, information capture and dissemination
   and the associated support tools. In particular, the following actions should be
   considered by the NNEC Governance authorities in order to ensure achievement
   of the above objectives (full details can be found in section 5 of this document):

      a. Doctrine and policy related actions:

              i. Develop, approve and implement adequate information assurance
                 policies for information sharing.

             ii. Finalize and detail the NNEC Data Strategy.

             iii. Develop, approve and implement a cyber defence policy.

      b. Processes related actions:

              i. Develop, test and implement processes for collaboration and
                 synchronisation (most easily under the umbrella of current DJSE
                 Standing operational procedures).

             ii. Develop, test and implement processes for information sharing with
                 non-military entities.

             iii. Develop, test and implement processes for ISR data sharing
                  beyond current MAJIIC nations.

             iv. Develop and implement training for the above.

      c. Information related actions:

              i. Develop collaboration information requirements specification.

             ii. Develop joint situational awareness requirements specification.

             iii. Define and resolve cross domain exchange of information.

      d. Assets-related actions:

              i. Speed-up the development and implementation of collaboration
                 services and collaboration tools.


                        NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                    Page 21
                         NATO UNCLASSIFIED

              ii. Enable effective reach-back in support of collaboration.

             iii. Development and implementation of core technical services,
                  information exchange gateways (types B and C) and supporting
                  DCIS kits.

       e. Implementation-related actions:

              i. Develop and build facilities for test, training and evaluation of
                 collaboration services and tools.

              ii. Develop research and development and experimentation
                  requirements in support of collaboration, situational awareness and
                  ISR information sharing.

       f. NNEC-related actions:

              i. Speed-up the development of the NNEC-criteria.

              ii. Develop NNEC assessment tools (including the NNEC Maturity
                  model and the NNEC Maturity Levels).

             iii. Complete the population of the NNEC Roadmap and the systematic
                  timely strategic analysis

6. The risks for failing to achieve the above are mostly institutional (de-centralize
   nature of NATO) and schedule-based (complexity of coordinated programmatic
   and funding in NATO). Technology risks exist but are considered less relevant if
   proper and anticipated research and development and experimentation are
   addressed. In support of risk management, the roadmap is considered as a good
   tool for risk mitigation as it alerts and helps describing the NNEC execution risks.
   Nevertheless, the tool (roadmap) in itself will be of little use unless risks are
   address and removed through proper, well-informed political and funding
   decisions.

7. The outcome of the October 2009 NNEC Roadmap strategic analysis say very
   little about national contribution to NNEC. This is reasonable due to the practical
   impossibility of engaging nations into the early stages of the roadmap
   development and population, but this situation should be urgently addressed and
   corrected.

8. In addition to the above, the analysis results show that it is urgent to identify and
   engage the different communities of interest (operational, technical and
   programmatic-oriented) into the population of the NNEC roadmap.




                         NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                      Page 22
                         NATO UNCLASSIFIED


ANNEX A: References


[NC3B DS02, 2009]     AC/322-DS(2009)0002. “Meeting in NNEC Governance Session
                      held at NATO headquarters, 20 May 2009”. Decision Sheet, 22
                      June 2009. NATO Unclassified.

[NNEC FS, 2005]       NATO C3 Agency. “NATO Network Enabled            Capability
                      Feasibility Study”, 2005. NATO Restricted.

[ACT RM02, 2009]      ACT-NNEC-RM-004/02. “NATO Network Centric Enabled
                      Capability (NNEC) Introduction to the NNEC Roadmap”, 2009.
                      NATO Unclassified.




                         NATO UNCLASSIFIED                               Page 23
                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED


ANNEX B: Pre-built Filter Queries

  ID      Filter Name                                     Filter Result
  1    _Trace             Will show all Tasks Linked to the selected Task
  2    Air C2 MTP         Will show all Enablers that originated in the Air C2 MTP
  3    All Tasks          Will show all tasks in the Roadmap file
  4    Architecture MTP   Will show all Enablers that originated in the Architecture MTP

  5    Asset Enablers     Will show all Enablers in the Asset Category
  6    Battle             Will show all Enablers that support the Battle Management Focus Area
       Management
       Tasks
  7    C2 Tasks           Will show all Enablers that support the C2 Focus Area
       Milestone
  8    Capability         Will show all Enablers that are associated with a specified Capability
       Package?           Package
  9    CES MTP            Will show all Enablers that originated in the Core Enterprise Services MTP


  10   COI MTP            Will show all Enablers that originated in the COI MTP
  11   Comms Services     Will show all Enablers that originated in the Communications Services
       MTP                MTP
  12   Critical           Will show all Enablers tagged as Critical by an analyst - not the same as
                          the critical path
  13   Date Range…        Will show all Enablers that start and finish within the specified dates


  14   DP Enablers        Will show all Enablers that support the Doctrine and Policy Category

  15   DP Enablers that   Will show all Enablers that support the Doctrine and Policy Category and
       Support JISR for   the JISR Focus Area for a specified Milestone
       Milestone…

  16   Enablers - No      Will show all Tasks that are not Summary level tasks
       Summary Tasks
  17   Enablers To Be     Will show all task marked for Review by Analyst
       Reviewed
  18   Enablers with No   Will show all Tasks with no predecessor or successor links
       Predesessor or
       Successor
  19   Enablers with No   Will show all Tasks with no successor links
       Successor
  20   Force Protection   Will show all Enablers that support the Force Protection Focus Area
       Tasks
  21   Implementation     Will show all Enablers that support the Implementation Category
       Enablers




                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                                 Page 24
                          NATO UNCLASSIFIED

ID      Filter Name                                     Filter Result
22   Implementation     Will show all Enablers that support the Implementation Category and are
     Enablers and       linked to the selected task
     Trace
23   Incomplete Tasks   Will show all tasks that are not yet completed

24   Info Assurance     Will show all Enablers that originated in the Information Assurance MTP
     MTP
25   Information        Will show all Enablers that support the Information Category
     Enablers
26   Intel Funct        Will show all Enablers that originated in the Intelligence Functional
     Services MTP       Services (JISR) MTP
27   Interoperability   Will show all Enablers that originated in the Interoperability MTP
     MTP
28   Items With Notes   Will show all tasks with analyst Notes attached
29   JISR and Trace     Will show all Enablers that support the JISR Focus Area for a specified
                        Milestone and are linked to the selected task


30   JISR Tasks         Will show all Enablers that support the JSIR Focus Area
31   Land C2 MTP        Will show all Enablers that originated in the Land C2 MTP

32   Log Tasks          Will show all Enablers that support the Logistics Focus Area

33   Logistics C2 MTP   Will show all Enablers that originated in the Logistics C2 MTP

34   Maritime C2 MTP    Will show all Enablers that originated in the Maritime C2 MTP


35   Milestone          Will show all Milestone Objectives that support the specified Milestone
     Objectives…
36   Mission Analysis   Will show all Enablers that support the Mission Analysis Focus Area and
     and Trace          are linked to the selected task
37   Mission Analysis   Will show all Enablers that support the Mission Analysis Focus Area
     Tasks
38   NNEC Enablers      Will show all Enablers that support the NNEC Coherence Category

39   NNEC Enablers      Will show all Enablers that support the NNEC Coherence Category and
     and Trace          linked to the specified task
40   NNEC Milestone?    Will show all enablers marked by analyst as supporting the specified
                        Milestone
41   Not Mapped and     Will show all Enablers that are not derived from an MTP or other direct
     Trace              input and that are linked to a specified task




                          NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                                  Page 25
                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED

ID      Filter Name                                      Filter Result
42   Not Programmed       Will show all Enablers that are not associated with a specific Capability
     and Trace            Package or other direct input and that are linked to a specified task


43   Organization or      Will show all Enablers that support the Organization or the General Focus
     Gen and Trace        Area and are linked to the selected task


44   Organization         Will show all Enablers that support the Organization Focus Area
     Tasks
45   Process Enablers     Will show all Enablers that support the Process Category

46   Summary Tasks        Will show all tasks that are Summary Tasks
47   Target Fires Tasks   Will show all Enablers that support the Target Acquisition and Fire Support
                          Focus Area
48   Trace and            Will show all Enablers that are linked to the selected task and support the
     Milestone Focus      specified Milestone




                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                                Page 26
                              NATO UNCLASSIFIED


ANNEX C: Process Example Detailed Discussion

The following is a simplified example of how an analyst would employ the Roadmap
toolset to gather information to answer the questions presented:

Can Milestone 1 be reached by the goal date of 2012?

      Set the Roadmap to GANTT Chart View and observe the completion date
       projected – in this case it is 2/28/13
      Select the Milestone 1 task and execute a <Trace> with Driving Tasks - this will
       highlight the tasks that drive the schedule:
           „Collaboration Tools Increment 2‟ not scheduled for completion until
              2/28/13
                   Look at <Task Summary> for „Collaboration Tools increment 2‟
                          Was extracted from the Core Enterprise Services MTP
                          An Asset Enabler under Develop teal Time Collaboration
                             Tools
                          Flag for Review – Select Yes
              Select ‘Collaboration Tools Increment 2’ and execute a <Trace> (
                   Figure 5)
                          This shows which objectives are supported by „Collaboration
                            Tools Increment 2‟ and which Enablers are connected
             Conclusion: Milestone 1 is reachable according to the current Roadmap
              data with the exception of one Asset Enabler that requires review




                                Figure 5: Example Filter 1




                              NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                  Page 27
                                           NATO UNCLASSIFIED

        Objectives Analysis for achievement of Milestone 1 goals

        What Objectives are Critical?

               Set the Roadmap to GANTT Chart View
  Select the Milestone 1 task and execute a <Trace> with Driving Tasks - this will highlight the tasks that drive the
                                                     schedule (
               Figure 6)
               Scroll to the Milestone 1 Objectives section of the roadmap – this will show the
                objectives that are on the critical path for Milestone 1




                                             Figure 6: Example Filter 2

        Evaluate the composition of Enablers supporting a specific Objective?

               Set the Roadmap to GANTT Chart View
Select the Objective in question – ‘ Develop Deployable Forces Capability’ for this example – and execute a <Trace> -
                        this will show all of the enablers and objectives linked to the objective (
               Figure 7)
                    This view can be analyzed in many ways – review supporting objectives;
                       review supporting enablers; review schedule conflicts; review to ensure all
                       enablers of interest are properly linked to the Objective; review to ensure
                       Objective has sufficient support from enablers and the support is spread
                       across multiple domains




                                           NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                                 Page 28
NATO UNCLASSIFIED




Figure 7: Example Filter 3




NATO UNCLASSIFIED            Page 29
                                          NATO UNCLASSIFIED

       Enablers Analysis

       What Enablers are Critical for Milestone 1 Objectives?

               Set the Roadmap to GANTT Chart View
Select the Milestone 1 task and execute a <Trace> with Driving Tasks - this will highlight the Enablers that drive the
                                                     schedule (
               Figure 8)




                                            Figure 8: Example Filter 4




                                          NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                                  Page 30
                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED

What Enablers are un-programmed for Milestone 1 Objectives?

      Set the Roadmap to GANTT Chart View
      Select the Milestone 1 task and execute a <Trace> - this will highlight the
       Enablers that support Milestone 1 Objectives
      At this point several Tags are relevant
            Select the <Not Map and Trace> filter to show those Enablers that are not
               mapped directly to a current MTP – there are 65 enablers in this example
            The <CP> filter is relevant as well, but is not currently considered accurate
               due to lack of sufficient information to fully populate. This Tag shows
               enablers that are directly mapped to Capability Packages

What Enablers are unscheduled for Milestone 1?
   Set the Roadmap to GANTT Chart View
   Select the Milestone 1 task and execute a <Trace> - this will highlight the
     Enablers that support Milestone 1 Objectives
   Select the filter <Not Scheduled and Trace> - this will highlight all enablers in the
     Trace that have a not yet been given a scheduled finish date (Figure 9)




                             Figure 9: Example Filter 5




                            NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                     Page 31
                              NATO UNCLASSIFIED

What Enablers overlap?

     This is an analysis is performed by an analyst expert using the Roadmap and
      related tools and additional subject matter knowledge to determine overlaps in
      Enablers

Cross Functional Threads

     This is an analysis is performed by an analyst expert using the Roadmap and
      related tools and additional subject matter knowledge
     Objective analysis is performed to evaluate the composition of Enablers
      supporting a specific Objective - as described above
     The results of this analysis for multiple objectives is compared by the analyst
      expert to determine common threads and high-impact enablers - in the example
      case, the high impact threads are:
           Synchronization of processes and information requirements between
             concepts and capabilities
         Development and implementation of a forces wide collaboration capability (
            Figure 10)




                              NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                       Page 32
                                     NATO UNCLASSIFIED




                                      Figure 10: Example Filter 6


Development and implementation of a common Comprehensive Approach for engagement planning and execution (
             Figure 11)




                                      Figure 11: Example Filter 7

             The high-impact threads can then be further examined to determine specific
              enablers of interest in different categories using the filters for Doctrine and Policy,
              Process, Information, Assets, Implementation, and NNEC Coherence



                                     NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                           Page 33
                                        NATO UNCLASSIFIED

      What are the critical Implementation and NNEC Coherence Issues to achieve
      Milestone 1?

             Set the Roadmap to GANTT Chart View
             Select the Milestone 1 task and execute a <Trace> with Driving Tasks - this will
              highlight the Enablers that drive the schedule and support Milestone 1 Objectives
         Select the filter <NNEC Enablers and Trace> to show critical NNEC Enablers for Milestone 1 (
             Figure 12)




                                         Figure 12: Example Filter 8

Select the filter <Implementation Enablers and Trace> to show critical Implementation Enablers for Milestone 1 (
             Figure 13)




                                         Figure 13: Example Filter 9

             Using these results and subject matter expertise, an analyst expert can develop
              a summary of the critical Implementation and NNEC Coherence Issues to
              achieve Milestone 1




                                        NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                               Page 34
                         NATO UNCLASSIFIED


ANNEX D: Acronyms


ACO       Allied Command Operations
ACT       Allied Command Transformation

C2        Command and Control
CA        Coherence Area
CBRN      Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear
CDIS      Cross-Domain Information Sharing
CES       Core Enterprise Services
CIP       Capability Improvement Package
CoE       Centre of Excellence
CoI       Community of Interest
CSD       Common Shared Database
CUR       Capability Urgent Requirement

DCIS      Deployable Communication and Information System

FOC       Full Operational Capability

HQ        Head Quarter

ICT       Integrated Capability Team
IEG       Information Exchange Guard
IPB       Intelligence Preparation of Battlefield
ISR       Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance

JISR      Joint Intelligence Surveillance Reconnaissance

L&G       Leadership and Guidance
L&G SG    Leadership and Guidance Steering Group
LINC      Limited Interim NRF CIS
LINCE     Limited Interim NRF CIS Extended
LoA       Level of Ambition

MAJIIC    Multi-sensor Aerospace-Ground Joint Intelligence Surveillance and
          Reconnaissance Interoperability Coalition
MC        Military Committee
MTP       Mid Term Plan

NATO      North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NC3       NATO Consultation, Command and Control
NDPP      NATO Defence Planning Process
NII       Networking and Information Infrastructure
NML       NNEC Maturity Levels

                         NATO UNCLASSIFIED                                    Page 35
                    NATO UNCLASSIFIED

NMRR   NATO Metadata Registry and Repository
NNEC   NATO Network-Centric Enabled Capability

OCRI   Operations Concepts and Requirements Implications

SME    Subject Matter Expert




                    NATO UNCLASSIFIED                      Page 36