Site Visit Executive has responsibility to set up Logistics programme case studies setting out acceptable ranges of weapon system performance objectives.  Corresponding product support capacity required to meet that level of performance was examined at kickoff sessions where objectives, timeline & skills set composition for strategy implementation were outlined.

Site Visit Executive sponsors Product Support Activities case study to delineate any limitations, constraints or boundary conditions so obstacles to executing coordinated field-level operations are reflected.

Baseline surveys were conducted to assess proficiency/experience of product support teams.  Potential barriers include execution of appropriate timing, alignment of stakeholders, accurate tracking of sustainment costs and difficulties encountered in efforts to improve supply line performance.

Logistics programme efforts generally focus on establishing limited sets of outcome metrics based on performance — such as weapons system availability, mission reliability, extent of logistics footprint, and/or overall system readiness levels.

Site Visit Executive must design smart approach/activity so configuration control will be maintained. Specific factors lined up with Logistics programme activities include design rights, design responsibility, support concept, associated cost/benefit determination and risk mitigation.

Logistics programme strategies are constructed to incentivise desired product support outcomes covering both design & subsequent sustainment phases. Use of properly incentivised ranges of performance to define metrics can provide real flexibility essential to meeting field-level demand signals.

Site Visit Executive has examined processes utilised in identification of performance metrics. Two different outcomes can be pursued for availability: either defined level of supply line availability or requirement for parts to be delivered within a specified amount of time.

It is important to select an outcome so product support team has control, and can be held responsible for achieving outcome. For example, Site Visit Executive has highlighted potential of goals to shorten amount of time between logistics demand and delivery of parts.

When Site Visit Executive authorises standards for defined levels of support or performance, then responsibilities for decisions such as what items to repair & what quantity of items to procure transitions to support provider, along with risk determinations for achieving operational effectiveness.

But field-level objectives are not always directly stated as useful metrics because support provider sometimes does not control availability activities. Most Service logistics policies mandate preferences for organisational level maintenance & retail supply functions to be performed by Service.

Logistics programmes can contract effectively to increase capability/capacity of equipment work orders and address parts component non-availability challenges.  Efficacy of Site Visit Executive action differs mainly in scale, covering broad range from part component level up to system platform level. On one end of the spectrum is an individual part, while at the other end is the entire weapons system.

Identification and cataloging of spare parts provides framework for integration/interoperability of logistics support during sustainment to serve as useful tools in systems engineering decisions and reducing logistics footprint.  Screening serves to identify where new items must be designed or existing items need to be modified for improved performance.

Spare part type-specific work orders are usually easiest to implement since estimates for current baseline and level of support required are more readily obtained because sometimes only involves single supplier.

Weapons system logistics programme product support levels introduce higher degree of complexity. Not only must past costs/benefit determinations & reliability be captured for much larger array of parts, but more product support suppliers will contribute to effort.

When product support providers are rewarded for performance, not per item track, status advances are directly impacted so incentivised to reduce both number of repairs & cost of expenditures for utilised parts/labour. When support providers are not incentivised to make best use of parts for repairs, mission success is compromised.

Despite Site Visit Executive creation of smart concepts for plans & proactive budgeting, adjustments and reprioritisation of weapon system operational requirements are inevitable because mission demand signal scenarios are always changing.

Unreconciled mismatch between requirements and support funding results in Logistics programme instability in turn producing sub-optimal build, overhaul & maintenance resources.  

Site Visit Executive must envision flexible design of useful case studies to derive establishment of product support level ranges so accommodation for fluctuating resources is allowed. Case studies serve as axis between requirements, allocation & sustainment processes in terms of defining weapons system support. 

Logistics programme contracts with product support providers must  include adequate exit criteria or ‘off-ramps’ should worst-case scenarios arise included as negotiated options for acquisition, transfer, or use of technical design rights, support tooling/equipment provisions, and conversion training required for reconstitution or recompetition of support work orders.

Here, we outline current intent, contents, and structure of obstacles and limitations of weapons system product support case studies. Over time, as smart logistics programme implement/apply models are derived from case studies, more corresponding guidance will be issued by Site Visit Executive. Limitations include:

1. No focus on tracking supplier source selection transition

2. Lengthy testing validate & tech insertion design process

3. Increased contract quote disconnect on demand signals

4. Lack of framework to guide tools for resource allocation

5. Little input/innovative push from field support end-user

6. Wide array of supplier schedules to integrate demand

7. Insufficient authority to promote interoperable systems

8. Services do not scope key prototype specs design

9. Inconsistent year-to-year funding risk level impact

10. Disconnect between DoD & Supplier expectations

1.   Match Field-level Requirements & Product Support 

When considering equipment sustainment strategy, Site Visit Executive always starts in the same place: identifying Field-level mission requirements of Troops. In most cases, field-level requirement will consist of what equipment is to be available/reliable allocated by dispatchers at system, subsystem, or component levels. Key objectives of product support teams is to execute sustainment strategies to hit mission readiness capability targets. If sustainment objectives for equipment item platform have not yet been explicitly stated by Site Visit Executive, platform-level dispatchers must work with field-level units to establish product support quotes to designate top-level sustainment outcome metrics as appropriate. The first step for product support team strategy is to identify operational requirements for equipment system being supported — even if Site Visit Executive is considering product support team action at the subsystem or component level to utilise materiel use or operational availability as assigned metric. Product Support Team strategies for action are not “one size fits all,” so must be tailored to specific needs of programme as appropriate detail in assessment reports to assist dispatchers in creation, renegotiation, and/or new solicitations of product support action. So far, Site Visit Executive has realised sustainment process may require application more rigor since current policy is at times inadequate.

2. Form Product Support Subject Matter 

Site Visit Executive to leverage the sustainment subject matter expertise supplemented by dispatchers responsible for dealing with component suppliers and other outside organisations. Dispatcher action forms collaborative working body comprising application of skills to realise product support solutions. Site Visit Executive maintains directive control of dispatchers in all programme phases, so teams are well prepared for milestone reviews & Logistics Performance Assessments. Site Visit Executive responsibilities include charge to ensure collective dispatcher input, expertise & support are leveraged to address required product support work order tasks interface with Logistics, Engineering, Contracting functional groups specific to field-level requirement response. Composition of structured dispatcher teams drives success of pre-execution efforts to include issuance of product support quotes. Meeting fiscal requirements can be among the most challenging issues Site Visit Executive faces when implementing smart programme processes.

 3. Baseline Product Support System 

Site Visit Executive has decided to assess “As-Is” product support strategies/plans to determines if more attention is warranted to change expectations for execution in current baseline. “As-Is” assessments identify both possible barriers as well as improvement opportunities. Insight/Recommendation Generation Baselining the System is quick assessment to give Site Visit Executive insight as to if logistics performance-based strategies is feasible. Additionally, assessments provide sufficient decision-making information utilised for determining extent to which dispatcher review is required. Confidence in assessment is limited by dispatcher ability to allocate performance measures lower than major subsystems e.g., structure, propulsion, mission equipment etc.  For fielded systems, full scope of assets/services will be considered in potential design of new options. For instance, dispatchers must scope assessment to an appropriate level to consider product support elements to be included. Action will conclude with “Go/No-Go” recommendation for continued assessments based upon potential benefits realised with enact change in sustainment strategy coupled with product support quote feasibility. Site Visit Executive must review opportunities for field-level mission readiness improvements strategy would provide & explore potential redesign.

  4. Identify Product Support Metrics 

Site Visit Executive has maintained establishment of limited top level sustainment metrics to measure if product support teams are doing good job delivering successful field-level equipment outcomes the Service is buying.  Top level performance metrics must have specific targets established so sustainment providers will be evaluated based on if targets are met or instead fall short of expectations. Other metrics could be established to assist in promotion of dispatcher reviews aimed at understanding causative factors.  However, many lower level metrics will not have targets, incentives or disincentives tied to them. Metrics for support should be identified early in strategy establishment and made more effective as programme progresses into implementation of Logistics Phases. Once Site Visit Executive has determined appropriate equipment system, subsystem, or component level support elements, selection of metrics can begin to measure performance against specific product support elements dispatchers can control. For example, if product support teams are responsible for performing aircraft system training, determining skill composition of qualified/certified maintainers is appropriate metric. One of most important considerations for selecting metrics sets is understanding how they link/contribute to top-level performance outcomes and each other. Therefore, in addition to understanding how metrics impact dispatcher control of outcomes, there are benefits to decompose metrics, so Site Visit Executive can begin to understand how metrics can be used to reinforce/complement each other.

5. Perform Product Support Value Assessment

Once strategies promoted by Site Visit Executive are defined in sufficient detail to support smart assessments, next step is to determine relative cost/benefits & operational risk of changes to product support impact evaluation of performance, reliability, maintainability & supportability. If Site Visit Executive determines composition of factors with potential to override decision criteria, successful incorporation is realised by setting cost/benefit, risk & sensitivity values at useful levels. Objectives of product support cost/benefit estimation include compilation/forecast of factors impacting required product support tasks during  specified periods of performance. Once compiled, estimates for each design can be compared so inclusion with other criteria can be utilised in determining Utility Scores. Similar to cost/benefit assessments, risk determination must be tailored to field-level requirements by dispatcher action. Site Visit Executive has set out instructions for identifying, evaluating & characterising composite Risk Scores for each design. Many risk assessments techniques have been proposed as availabilities for programmes. Site Visit Executive must consider potential risk in order to incorporate conclusions into evaluation of the product support team design.

6. Designate Product Support Integrate

Once product support options have been assessed, dispatchers must be prepared to provide recommendations for Site Visit Executive approval. Selected product support team design is utilised to structure appropriate solicitations for Logistics Performance Provision. Dispatchers must evaluate product support requirements so follow on efforts are structured around achieving stated goals of requirement decomposition so appropriate allocation decisions are made at system subsystem and/or components levels. Performance outcomes/objectives are evaluated by metrics with defined threshold values so subsequent assessment are made possible. Some product support designs include information on timing/ phasing of operational risks. In addition to output from Product Support Value assessments, some political/organisational realities such as fiscal limitations or competing priorities can impact Site Visit Executive decisions.  Site Visit Executive must be pragmatic when presenting support solutions to consider all aspects of critical programme impacts such as sensitivity of sustainment performance to product support elements providing links between fiscal requirements and readiness. Links can be utilised to establish fiscal transfers/transitions between acquisition and Service materiel commands. Dispatcher actions serve to integrate product support and monitor execution of provided product support solution utilised by field-level units to meet mission requirements.

7.  Select Product Support Providers

Product support teams execute equipment upgrade/repair actions while dispatchers deal with suppliers under direction of Site Visit Executive. Within each dispatch element, work orders delineate into technical, hands-on & administrative tasks.  As dispatchers evaluate sustainment options, the optimal product support options are identified. If engaged early in process, product support teams can influence design for reliability, maintainability & supportability to leverage supply line factors related to concurrent procurements, redesigns & upgrades. Dispatchers are also in a position to control service life extension impacts on equipment quality by utilising work order interactions with supplier purchases across multiple product lines.  Product support teams provide expertise in improving equipment upgrade/repair process based on both product knowledge and experience. Site Visit Executive has clearly articulated unique quality of dispatcher capabilities-- no other source is capable of providing addition of new components or new users. Dispatchers have also demonstrated competence in resolving sustainment challenges by finding most optimal combination of additional spares, training, redesign, support equipment, upgrade/repair planning, etc. Site Visit Executive has presented clear framework for product support team interaction with dispatchers to accomplishing specific work order tasks required for field-level mission success. When Logistics arrangements with dispatchers includes equipment supplier base, Site Visit Executive must consider how integrate/provide teams will engage second/third tier suppliers in the execution of work order logistics performance assessments.  There are many examples in Logistics programmes where failure to set up dispatcher systems to consider supplier base issues has caused problems in executing the desired sustainment strategy.  It is also important to consider integration/teamwork requirements between dispatchers and Site Visit Executive so successful product support operations are realised.

  8. Align Product Support Incentives with Outcomes 

Good Outcomes for logistics programmes require Site Visit Executive stability/priority and sufficient resources so requirements are met. Strategies establishing product support teams must consider multiple options to mitigate risks resulting from supplier and field-level unit disconnect making sure product support uncertainty/variability is accommodated by dispatcher skill sets. In addition to these considerations above, provisions of logistics programmes must provide both parties adequate adjustment flexibility so solid connections are maintained.  Dispatcher process protections with suppliers establish structure so incentive remains to make appropriate investments in improvements, ultimately boosting field-level mission readiness. When determining most appropriate mechanism to fund sustainment operations, it is important to utilise Site Visit Executive guidance provided to source success in equipment component supply, upgrade/repair Job Site & transit activities. If dispatchers utilise equipment supply lines for subsystems or components, strong advocacy is required in sufficient amounts to maintain product support team consistency. Types of appropriation depend upon equipment service life phase-- usually initially RDT&E switching to O&M during sustainment. Direct appropriations have the potential to create multi-year logistics operations but Site Visit Executive must determine appropriate sourcing mechanism for setting up product support teams, keeping in mind consideration of request timing is critical to mission success. Paralleling variability of organisational approval team competence is  inherent complexity making results of resourcing efforts championed by Site Visit Executive time consuming & challenging.  So it is beneficial to begin process of determining product support initiation early in equipment service life to avoid any delays in providing resources to field-level units.

9. Establish Product Support Team Assignments

Chief objective of product support team establishment is to deliver on field-level requirement requests also to incentivise suppliers to innovate. Attributes of effective product support programmes arrangements include objective, measurable work order description to acquire successful product support outcome and establishing limited set of metrics number of metrics linked to desired field-level mission outcomes & efficiency goals. Smart evaluation of actual cost/benefit realities will provide dispatchers firm baselines for determining if supplier deals include advances in innovation and process improvements. For example, Site Visit Executive has established new requirements so actual performance criteria of meeting sustainment requirements is provided prior to follow-on dispatcher negotiations to ensure best value results.  Deals including additional incentives to impact supplier behaviour means eligibility for additional periods of performance measure evaluation are a good way to incentivise /motivate suppliers. Product support team establishment also include mandates for supplier provision of innovative products so Logistics programmes can realise more field-level mission success and receive increased levels of equipment performance/reliability as direct result of improved strength of supply line connections. Specifics of product support team establishment must be agreeable to all supply line connection stakeholders and align well with vision of Site Visit Executive equipment sustainment strategies for the programme.

  10. Implement Product Support Operations

Tracking equipment supply line performance is critical part of Logistics programme administration, so establishment of product support teams cannot be “fire and forget” endeavours. Assuring Monitor of routine Quality Assurance reviews and performance assessments requires close collaboration between stakeholders if Site Visit Executive is to be successful in ambitious efforts to drive serious advances in Readiness outcomes for the Force. Proactive corrective measures based on changing field-level requirements or system design changes must be undertaken to meet performance targets. Executing product support activities is iterative process requires Site Visit Executive to monitor performance and assess perpetually changing conditions so optimal results are achieved. Product support teams are responsible for ensuring the quality of all work orders performed, while Site Visit Executive is responsible for monitor to address What gets measured, when, and who does it. Establishing processes to identify/address quality issues requires continuous activity designed to determine if work orders being performed meet or exceed  quality performance standards. Chief objective is to prevent substandard work order execution, rather than correct for it later. Design rigor of quality assurance process must match programme goals to be  major element in product support team control, focusing on insight, not oversight and independent of work order success being measured. Stakeholders must ensure Site Visit Executive is give resources/authority to review product support processes because simply reporting on measurement drivers will not ensure quality standards are maintained.  Logistics Programme Assessments provide Site Visit Executive with objective view of product support planning to include equipment supportability & sustainability checks. Sharing lessons learned with administrators responsible for operations in the Services increases strength/competence of Performance Logistics cadre professionals in DoD. Product Support teams must establish frequent, internal & formal performance metrics reviews and execute work order level vision of Site Visit Executive. If product support teams encounter “off-track” performance, progress reports/meetings will be organised by Site Visit Executive to drive attention back toward field-level mission requirement targets.

Establishing quality of Mission/task execution is foundation of all operational planning. Smart design of tactics provides basis for preparing initial estimates of product support in completing logistics operation work orders. All field-level units receive orders from Site Visit Executive specifying critical operational mission implementation tasks.

Work Orders executed by Logistics teams parallel efforts of other functional area experts in identifying logistics tasks either specified, implied, or essential to mission. Specified tasks are stated explicitly in Site Visit Executive work orders. Contexts of implied directives are not always stated, but are required for realising mission success.

During planning, logistics teams must identify constraints or restraints with potential to limit field-level freedom of action and identify criteria to be met before taking certain actions e.g., boundaries, timing, coordination requirements, preconditions, mandated equipment levels, resource apportionments, and allocations.

Assumptions identify critical factors affecting course of action, assigned mission, or task. Logistics Teams resolve resource shortfalls affecting the assigned mission or task by changing equipment location, replenishment, modification to specify course of action, or assignment of work order tasks.

Planning for single missions or contingencies is relatively straightforward but rarely the norm. Multiple, concurrent operations frequently occur with requirements conflicting/competing for same resources and constrain preparations for response. Logistics planners accommodate potential or actual competing requirements for resources by apportioning or allocating available resources, establishing mobilisation priorities, and anticipating field-level demand signals.

Resources apportionment and allocation decisions establish how much of particular resource is available to Site Visit Executive charged with delineation of competing requirements; clearly fundamental feature of deliberate planning. In time-sensitive planning, apportionment sometimes blends into allocation for actual mobilisation of limited resources to meet multiple mission objectives.

Apportionment and allocation are processes dividing limited resources, but usually do not always satisfy projected consumption or provide desired sustainment levels. Resolution of shortfalls may require Site Visit Executive intervention to obtain increased apportionments and allocations or modifications to the concept of operations. Identification of potential apportionment support shortfalls in logistics plans is critical to ensure mission success factors spelled out in operational plans.

Site Visit Executive must establish mobilisation and location-specific priorities for apportioned or allocated logistics resources. These priorities determine what field-level units will receive what resources, when. Priorities are initially based on creation of operational concepts to be modified as new situations are presented.

Determining extent of field-level demand signals for assigned missions and tasks is utilised to determine resources, requirements, and shortfalls so uncertainty is reduced, but sometimes cannot entirely remove the impact of unanticipated support demands.

However, timely/smart discharge of Site Visit Executive work orders can minimise extent of surprise and potential effect on operations.  Additionally, planning gives Site Visit Executive opportunity to assess changes in operational area space of assigned forces & mission requirements so flexibility in planning addresses most unanticipated demands.

For all field-level equipment demand signals, logistics core capabilities provide Site Visit Executive with ability to accomplish defined logistics functions. Core organisational capabilities include individual, functional logistics operating systems to exist at each field-level tied together by Site Visit Executive, essential components to distinguishing expeditionary character.

Logistics doctrine indicates principles fundamental to all logistics operating systems for mobile, equipment deployment systems making up extent of functional resources and procedures. Functional resources consist of administrative organisations, dispatch staff, equipment assets & installation structure.

 Procedures include functional processes utilised not only for locating resources where they are needed but also determine application of defined resources to generate logistics capability. Logistic operating systems joined with Site Visit Executive work order execution address all logistics functions tasked at field-level operations.

Well-designed command /control of logistics enables Site Visit Executive to recognise requirements and provide resources required for mission success. Work Orders must provide visibility of both capabilities and requirements so Site Visit Executive can make smart decisions required for effective allocation of scarce, high-demand resources.

Additionally, command /control facilitates the integration of logistics operations with other field-level functions so Site Visit Executive has fully optimised time for planning, decision, execution, and assessment. Only when work orders effectively support logistics tactics can Site Visit Executive execute allocation  of capabilities to provide for shared real-time picture of field-level demand signals, anticipate requirements, prioritise resources, and provide for timely monitor of resource mobilisation.

Site Visit Executive is responsible for designated matters of logistics policy and work order execution. Logistics actions are coordinated with field-level units making up most essential tactical parts for ensuring mission success. Specific functions within administrative scope of Equipment Logistics Support Teams include:

1.   Coordination of equipment logistics for ground support & readiness requirements utilised for prepositioning

2.   Creation of logistics plans/programmes for field-level units representing  maintenance and supply policies/procedures

3.   Representation of  field-level requests for execution of maintenance, test equipment plans & integrated logistics support for subsystems  

4.   Provision of comments, directions, and recommendations on logistics support for equipment systems in design phases or procurement

5.   Implementation of programme requirements for expeditionary missions including, but not limited to equipment such as arresting gear, lighting systems & ground support parts.

6.   Determination of equipment priorities during Planning, Programming & System processes so materiel is routed correctly to ensure adequate field-level outfitting

7.   Function as field-level unit specialists in equipment maintenance,  supply, product support services, and other logistics functions

8.   Identification, monitor, and resolution of  installation, encroachment, compatible use zone & field-level criteria issues/problems

9.   Review of field-level activity operational processes, site evaluation reports, advanced installation functional components, reserve materiel required for range/target instruments

10.  Assist product support organisations in planning, programming, design execution & fielding of automated logistics processing of equipment
1.  Programme Service Life  Cost Estimate:

Identification of all cost elements pertaining to the total life of a project, beginning with mission feasibility and extending through operations/support. Backs up Acquisition & investment decision-making process to support budget planning with exhaustive and structured determination of all costs related to programme. Becomes project budget baseline, ensuring costs are fully accounted for and minimised. Logistics is considered, with Iterative and on-going reviews  conducted by technical team to ensure credibility/accuracy.

2.  Independent Technical Economic Review:

Make sure independent estimate conducted by outside organisation using same detailed technical and procurement information.  Other estimates to support modifications include estimates for Conversion, Activation, Modernisation and Service Life Extension. Serves as comparison to programme estimate to assist in determining if cost estimate accurately captures all requirements. Results to be reconciled because of challenges in determining full scope of work to be accomplished.  Assess technical approach to programmes, detailing acquisition risk mitigation strategies & actual cost of work completed to date plus predicted cost/schedule for finishing remaining work. 

3.  Business Case Description Case Study:

Provides justification for proposed investment combining strategic reviews with comprehensive cost/benefit/risk reviews.   Business case is characterised by three primary functions: First, clarify/structure planning required for effective decision-making. Second, determine value of investment or business initiative. Third, guide on-going investment evaluations. Smart business case details acquisition, implementation, and performance measurement strategies to create foundation for detailed administrative plans designed to run equipment programme.

4.  Total Conversion Authority Factor:

Converting budget/programme money between implementation periods used to convert programme costs in terms of converting present to subsequent schedule periods. Publish as quick reference programme estimate teams. Updated frequently and accurately provided to decision-makers and contractors as requested.

5.  Build Contract Escalation Estimate:

 Summary report showing build contract escalation estimates by equipment system based on requestor inputs & actual/projected representation of expenditures. Used to determine Escalation line item of budget exhibit. Required for contracts containing compensation adjustment clauses provided on demand. Requests must provide the following inputs: Contract Start Dates, Delivery Schedule, Direct Labour, Indirect/Overhead, Materiel required for Engineering teams.

6.  Job Site Workload Representation Charts:

Determine resources impacts for design, construct, maintain, and repair equipment under contract at individual job sites to be subsequently baselined/aggregated to fit total levels, so process advances are provided upon request. If requesting alternative to current baselines, programme teams must be provided with build update assumptions of inputs described in previous section.

7.  Repair & Modernisation Job Site Rates:

Rates for work order terms describing amount of work accomplished on time to include historical rates as well as projections using either forward priced rates or escalated rates in appropriate indices.  Provides rates for individual  & average job site function. Used in creation of maintenance/modernisation budgets, and provision of installation cost estimates associated with proposed work order changes during availability schedules. 

8.  Build Conversion Schedule Progress Report:

Summary of major build schedule, progress & contract information for active programmes based on information stored in central source for metrics by acquisition/logistics teams. Creating reports assessing specific suppliers used to evaluate diminishing sources, source restrictions & other issues with potential to add risk to build events to provide as tasked by Programme Administrators.

9.  Special Candidate Job Site Feasibility Studies:

Provide feasibility review of candidate job sites supporting exploration of alternatives to require tasking/ funding by Programme decision makers. Job site information must include quality of skilled trade labour, capital infrastructure, shop areas, etc. Provide for timely direction to prepare contractor assessment reports and meet requirements of special inquiries. Conduct periodic survey to establish adequacy of mobilisation base to include accurate updates.

10.  Supporting Supplier Information Transfers:

Information about suppliers supporting build events must include timely description of labour skills, product line sales, lead times, capacity utilisation rates, etc.  to support preparation of Assessment Reports & special administrative  inquiries. Equipment parts supply extracts must be reported by Time period so supplier performance is evaluated.