AIR FORCE

TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSITION STRATEGY (TDTS)

GUIDEBOOK

Version 2

July 2010

ACCESSABILITY: This publication is available via the Defense Acquisition University, Acquisition Community Connection (ACC) page -> Life Cycle Logistics Community -> Policy and Guidance -> Air Force.

RELEASABILITY: DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Public Release

OPR:AFMC/A5S, 4375 Chidlaw Road, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433

SUPERCEDES: Technology Development and Transition Strategy (TDTS) Guidebook, August 2009

This publication is intended for use by Program Managers and technology developers.

This document is in the public domain and may be copied.

Feedback on this document is welcome. Please refer any feedback, questions, comments or corrections to HQ AFMC/A5S, , 937-904-3558 (DSN 674-3558), AFMC/A5S, 4375 Chidlaw Road, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Paragraph 1.1: Addition of a clarifying sentence

Paragraph 1.2: Deletion of an extraneous sentence

Paragraph 1.3: Re-title of the paragraph and addition of clarifying information

Paragraph 2.3: Deletion of a “requirement”, as this is a guide and not the appropriate document for this specific issue

Addition to Appendix 3 Glossary: Program Executive Officer (PEO)

Table of Contents

1Introduction

1.1Problem Description

1.2Big to Small

1.3Deconfliction of TDTS Guidebook with other Required Documentation: TDS/Technology Transition Agreement (TTA)/SEP/Early Systems Engineering (SE)

1.4Purpose of This Guidebook

2Technology Transition Strategy Development

2.1Overview of Technology Transition Process

2.2Why Use a Stage-Gate Process?

2.3To Whom Does This Strategy Development Process Apply?

2.4Who Is Involved With This Process?

2.5Timing

2.6Level of Approvals/Signature Authority

3Stage Checklists and Gate Exit Criteria

3.1Initial Tasks for Strategy Development

3.2Initial Strategy Requirements

3.3Gate #3 (Exiting Proof-of-Concept Stage and Entering Refinement Stage)

3.4Gate #4 (Exiting Refinement Stage and Entering Development Stage)

3.5Gate #5 (Exiting Development Stage and Entering Prototype Stage)

3.6Gate #6 (Exiting Prototype Stage to MS-B)

4Documenting the TDTS

4.1TDTS Content Overview

4.1.1Executive Summary

4.1.2Mission/Requirement

4.1.3Program Summary

4.1.4Program Management

4.1.5Business Strategy

4.1.6Program Risk Management

4.1.7Cost and Performance Management

4.1.8Systems Engineering Approach

4.1.9Test Approach

4.1.10Product Support Concept

5Summary

6Bibliography

Appendix 1 – Technology Readiness Level Definitions

Appendix 2 – Manufacturing Readiness Level Definitions

Appendix 3 – Glossary

Appendix 4 – Acronyms

Appendix 5 – Web Sites

1

Technology Development and Transition Strategy (TDTS) Guidebook

1Introduction

1.1Problem Description

A Government Accountability Office (GAO) study[1] found that the Department of Defense (DoD) routinely transitions immature technologies into its acquisition programs, thereby resulting in significant schedule delays, cost growth, and performance issues. Several recommendations were provided. One recommendation was to develop a gated process for developing and transitioning technology and to expand the use of technology transition agreements as one of the means to address this problem area. DoD concurred with this recommendation. This guidebook lays out a process for maturing technology and developing transition strategy based on a “stage-gate,”industry best practices approach.

The proposed exit criteria for each stage-gate are based on many factors, one of which isrisk management. Thiswill align both with DoD 5000 series instructions,which collectively serve as a reference resource for acquisition professionals and program management (PM) offices in dealing with system acquisition risks,and with the AFMCP 63-101 AFMC [Air Force Materiel Command] Risk Management Process,which provides PMs and their teams a basic understanding of the terms, definitions, and methods associated with effective risk management so that researchers and acquirers are speaking the same language.

1.2Big to Small

The crux of the problem lies in trying to transition technology that has not yet reached the stage of development expected by the receiving agent. The transition process flow is a well-known and well-understood process, documented by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)[2] and,as evidenced by its application of this approach in AFI 61-101 Applied Technology Council as well as various Major Command (MAJCOM) instructions, embraced by the Air Force (AF) for many years. Communication is paramount to developing and executing a long-term strategy that comprehensively spans technology maturation—from a given effort’s origins through a warfighter’s receipt of a new capability. A breakdown in communication obviously impedes not only strategic planning development, but also execution of the plan itself!

This TechnologyDevelopment and Transition Strategy (TDTS) Guidebookdetails recognized best practices for developing a viable technology maturation strategy that fully addresses the transition of capabilities to users (intended MAJCOM customers). Despite widely propagated awareness ofthe transition process, the general guidelines of the past have proveninsufficient to ensure success. Accordingly, the incorporation of a stage-gate process as an addition to the technology maturation cycle willhelp promote successful transitions by guidingvitalcommunications among the key players of an effort.

Specifically, this stage-gate process will promote early, active, and ongoing involvement and collaboration among technology developers, acquisition program offices, and user representatives to establish a comprehensive strategy—a TDTS—broken into smaller, more manageable stages. Though it necessitates more upfront planning, a well-conceived TDTS that uses the stage-gate approach will form the basis for required acquisition documentation and thus save subsequent time and effort in preparing for milestone reviews. Essentially, the stage-gate process is analogous to designing an acquisition strategy around phases and milestones. Stages denote the periodswhereinrespective activities occur, while gates markdeliverable reviewpoints and enable management to make knowledge-based go/no-go decisions according to pre-established exit criteria. Adherence to this process is fundamental to developing a timely and cost-effective transition strategy.

In capturing technology maturation effort objectives from Concept Exploration and Refinement (CER); identifying relevant issues; and recommending a transition, acquisition, and management approach as well as a support strategy, the TDTS document serves as a strategic planning tool for the life cycle of the technology effort, including its integration with the follow-on acquisition program. The stage-gate process provides the framework for developing a transition strategy using a collaborative, multifunctional team, establishing what roles and responsibilities should remain in effect throughout the technology maturation and transition.

Additionally, the TDTS documentaddresses all facets of the strategy (technical and programmatic) needed for developing (maturing) required technologies while simultaneously readying critical technology elements for transition to the end user. Requisite TDTS content is similar to the Life-Cycle Management Plan (LCMP) for formal acquisition programs; consequently, the TDTS will feed the draft LCMP at Milestones(MS)A and B and also satisfy the Technology Development Strategy (TDS) requirement. Further, TDTS content will reflect the information needed for building the Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) throughout all stages and gates. However, it is important to note that in most instances, technologies are developed for transition into components or subcomponents of other systems as enabling capabilities (e.g., increased thrust, improved thermal management, sensor fusion). While these technologies themselves may not be designated for a formal acquisition Program of Record (PoR), they should integrate in some manner into an acquisition program or logistics activity. Technology efforts not supporting an acquisition PoR will not demand compliance with many of the acquisition documentation requirements; however, early deliberate planning and informed decisionmaking will improve the likelihood of a successful transition.

Starting the strategy development and the stage-gate process early (i.e., once a MAJCOM customer is identified, and typically well before MS-A) will benefit every technology effort. Specifically, the process will drive a collaborative effort between the technology and acquisition communities to develop the transition strategy and a mutually agreed-upon technology maturation roadmap with well-defined cost, schedule, and performance parameters.

1.3Deconfliction of TDTS Guidebook with other Required Documentation: TDS/Technology Transition Agreement (TTA)/SEP/EarlySystems Engineering (SE)

The TDTS is a strategic planning tool to facilitate communication amongst a wide variety of individuals with a vested interest in a particular technology development activity. The focus of this TDTS Guidebook is to provide information about the best practices that are effective; it is not the intent to create a burdensome set of duplicitous documentation. The important aspect of this work is the collaboration to develop an effective strategy. It is encouraged that team members utilize existing information/documentation as source materials for the collaborative environment. Some of the documentation that is “replaced” by a TDTS, or has source information in other locations, is identified in this paragraph.

The TDTS document is designed to satisfy all needs of a TDS, including additional transition planning Therefore, as a given technology matures, the TDTS document becomes a “living” strategy—one that not only reflects the current state of the technology maturation effort relative to its ultimate transition to an acquisition program, but also satisfies the TDS requirement at MS-A. This milestone also indicates the starting point for building the draft LCMP. The stage-gate process revolves around technology transition that starts with a MAJCOM customer pull and ends at MS-B, and the TDTS document will eventually morph into the LCMP, which then undergoes approvalboth at the appropriate organizational levels and at the appropriate point (usually by MS-B) within the acquisition

TTA is the terminology used by OSD and other services (the AF refers to this document as a Technology Transition Plan, or TTP) that refers to a document identifying relevant issues surrounding the transition of a technology. A TTA/TTP typically involves participation from the technology, acquisition, and warfighting communities. The TDTS document is more comprehensive and has continuous support throughout the technology maturation and transition effort. The TTA/TTP is easily derived from the TDTS documentation. (Note: Upon availability of an automated tool, the TTA/TTP will simply be another report.)

Draft SEP development begins at program initiation, with the Concept Characterization and Technical Description (CCTD), and continues throughout SEP development as the program progresses, ultimately encompassing all SE requirements. TDTS Stage-Gates 3-6 represent a significant portion of the technical content of the initial SEP.

These complementary and dependent strategies provide senior management a framework for making decisions throughout the entire technology maturation cycle, including the technology’s transition into the acquisition process (via milestone review, contract award, partnering arrangements, and so on).

Since technology transition to (or from) industry is commonplace, the program office should release theTDTS Guidebook to industry as the accepted AF approach to technology maturation and transition planning. Early systems engineering is an approach for translating approved operational needs and requirements into operationally suitable systems. The approach consists of a top-down method, iterative throughout the technology maturation cycle and comprising requirements analysis; functional analysis and allocation;and design synthesis and verification for maintainability, reliability, interoperability, and survivability.

1.4Purpose of This Guidebook

This TDTS Guidebook is primarily designed to assist the creation of a technology maturation and transition strategy. It also outlines who should participate and when, as well as what issues should be discussed, what approval authorities are necessary, and what type of documentation will ensure development of a comprehensive strategy. For a technology maturation effort, this guidebook (1) provides a stage-gate process that identifies the typical set of tasks associated with each stage and a recommended minimum set of corresponding exit criteria—which, in turn, ensure the technology maturation effort proceeds according to the strategic plan;and(2) outlines the topics to be addressed (and content to be included) in a strategy developed for a technology’sintended transition to the warfighter. Essentially, this TDTS Guidebook facilitates the creation of effort-specific TDTS documentation that captures the strategic roadmap for a technology destined for an end user.

2Technology Transition Strategy Development

2.1Overview of Technology Transition Process

OSD[3] “best practice” for transitioning technology includes the following key activities: establishing a team, formulating the plan, developing information, coordinating and updating the information, obtaining commitment and approval at the proper stages, and executing transition (see top of Figure 1). This technology transition flow is understood by most technology developers and acquisition program managers. A key aspect of this flow is the iterative nature of technology maturation and transition activities, which requires a team of subject-matter experts collaborating across the development time frame. Without deliberate and proactive planning and coordination, the iterative nature of this flow can permit tasks or activities to “fall through the cracks,”increasing the likelihood that steps critical for successful transition will be missed.

Figure 1. Technology Transition Process Iterates Within Each Stage

The following points expand on the accepted technology transition practices identified in Figure 1:

  • Establish a Team: It is important that all relevant players be involved in developing the total strategy for advancing a technology to the weapon system. This team should flow out of the Concept Engineering Team (CET) that worked CER activity. Section 2.4 of this TDTS Guidebookbriefly describes Integrated Project Team (IPT) membership, including roles and responsibilities.
  • Formulate: The IPT must first baseline/assess the technology’s status in terms of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) (see Appendices 1 and 2 for definitions of TRL and MRL, respectively) and then initiate the overall maturation strategy for this technology. This strategy contains not only the details of the technology maturation effort, but also the requirements of the acquisition program. The exit criteria for each gate are also part of this strategy. (see bottom of Figure 1). Section 3 of this TDTS Guidebook discusses the suggested entrance and exit criteria of each stage-gate.
  • Develop Information: As the technology maturation effort progresses, the IPT must decide when the technology reaches the next readiness level according to pre-established exit criteria, which measure the technology’s readiness to proceed to subsequent levels. Exit criteria are based on team-approved TRL and MRL.[4]
  • Coordinate and Update: During each stage, the IPT must establish the plan for proceeding through the next gate, all while updating the overall transition strategy.
  • Commit and Approve: As the IPT progresses through the technology maturation effort, management/decision makers will continue to use agreed-upon exit criteria to evaluate current status of the effort and thereby make go/hold/no-go decisions, such as whether to continue toward the next stage orinstead alter strategy/approach, to include potential delay or termination of the effort. These decision points employ the stage checklists shown in Section 3 to ensure that IPT and managementdecision makers ask the right questions at the right time.

2.2Why Use a Stage-Gate Process?

Figure 1 (top)illustrates the iterative nature of the current technology maturation and transition process, as well as the tendency for this activity to occur over an extended period of time. The stage-gate approach is an industry-proven mechanism for effectively managing, directing, and otherwise controlling new product development efforts. As previously stated, stages denote periods during which certain activities occur, whereas gates enable knowledge-based deliverable reviews and, accordingly,informed decision making based on known criteria. Additionally—and critically—the stage-gate methodology identifies the intervals at which direction and/or level of work may undergo adjustment to ensure final product (or service) capacity to adequately meet MAJCOM customer needs.

Figure 1 (bottom) depicts the stage-gate process and its integration into traditional technology maturation stages (i.e., Proof of Concept, Breadboard, Brassboard, and Prototype). The stage-gate process manages technology maturation by dividing it into a predetermined set of events or activities developed specifically by period or phase (stage), each with a “transition review” (gate) having well-defined exit criteria. (Depending on the criticality of an effort, the current stage of the effort, and the particular acquisition program, the transition review may be a sizeable effort or may be integrated with scheduled annual program management reviews.) Since existing TRLs and MRLsare mature, well-established lexicons, the stage-gate process baseline reflects the alignment of TRL and MRL with traditional technology maturation stages. The process keeps its “eye on the prize,” generally building a strategy to get from TRL3 through TRL6 and transition to an acquisition program. At each gate awaits a recommended checklist that serves two purposes: (1) the team can tailor this checklist towardsits own uniquely devised exit criteria for demonstratingthe technology’s readiness to advance to the next stage, and (2) management can leverage the checklist as a tool for evaluating the team on its own readiness to proceed to the next stage.

Note:This differs from the current statutory requirement of conducting a Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) at MS-B, in that the stage-gate process is executed throughout the technology maturation effort and is anticipated to start prior to MS-A (once a MAJCOM customer has shown interest).

In addition, the series of gates are intended to provide a disciplined approach to executing a technology maturation effort, including consideration of all technical and acquisition factors associated with a successful transition. Ultimately, the use of the stage-gate process will facilitate laboratory, engineering, and programmatic reviews (such as the TRA at MS-B).

As the technology matures and approaches transitioninto a PoR (MS-B), acquisition requirements grow increasingly demanding; therefore, checklists evolve to include more acquisition-oriented material. This TDTS Guidebookwill eventually capture all DoDD 5000.2 requirements at each stage’s checklist in order to guide development and prepare the technology to confidently transition. In fact, to ensure seamless transition, the format for the TDTS document is derived from the LCMP required at MS-B. Essentially, the process can be aligned to the DoD Acquisition Milestones, as shown in Figure 2. For example, the technology should minimally reachTRL 3 for Materiel Development Decision (MDD), TRL 4 by MS-A, and TRL 6 by MS-B.