Product Mgmt Support SOO_Final.pdf

STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVE

FOR

PRODUCT MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT

I. BACKGROUND:

Business and Enterprise Systems (BES) Directorate (AFLCMC/HI) is aggressively pursuing the enterprise-wide integration of Software Product Management practices and mindset across the entire BES portfolio

(~2,170 personnel). The incorporation of Product Management is driven by the imperative to support our customers by delivering needed Defense Business Systems (DBS) capabilities to our end-users at the speed of relevance. The approach is consciously aggressive with the goal of moving from simply employing superficial buzzwords to competent practitioners within the next 12 months. Given the criticality the BES

Product Management Implementation has on the entire Air Force mission we envision a holistic, adaptable, tailorable approach.

II. OVERALL APPROACH:

A. Holistic: A very large aspect of the requirement will be focused on training and educating the workforce. Past BES experience within has demonstrated the futility of competing curriculum from multiple vendors, theoretically-sound course-ware with no practical application, or premature/misplaced training. In large part, BES’ success will be contingent on establishing a support mesh for the personnel assigned new and evolving responsibilities. Further, we expect a considerable need for organizational change management support while implementing across BES and throughout all elements of the support mesh. The support mesh will include four general paths focused on Product Management to include aspects of Service Management and Organizational Change Management:

1. On-line Tools/Training: Provide BES workers just-in-time job aids; tailorable implementation guides, and relevant on-line Product Management training.

2. On-site Training: Off-the-shelf course-ware with on-site instructors to provide personnel the foundational understanding of the Product Management mindset, philosophy and common practices.

The goal is primarily to level set the target audience to maximize the ROI of the Experiential

Learning workshops.

3. Experiential Learning: Appreciating the value of learning through reflection on doing, the on-line and on-site courses will be reinforced through immersive workshops. These workshops will be primarily small group engagements with 10-20 participants from specific Product Line(s). These workshops will address real-world issues currently impacting the delivery of value to the Product

Line’s customers and end-users.

4. Consultative Support: This support should include a mix of advisory, coaching, and one-on-one consulting services; to include, but not limited to, in-person, on-site, email, and video or teleconferences as required.

B. Adaptable: We expect any contracted support to adapt with the government as the implementation effort matures and progresses. At a minimum, the three factors below will drive some course correction with our approach as we move forward.

1. Learning curve: As BES learns and advances in maturity, the content and magnitude of support required will likely change to match the evolving maturity of the workforce.

2. Adoption Rate: The BES success rate in embracing the Product Management mindset and exhibiting the associated behaviors will determine the amount/content of required support.

3. Product Management Assessments: Periodic assessments will highlight Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats which may refocus efforts accordingly.

C. Tailorable: We expect support and training to be tailored to our organization. Though the BES Product

Management integration is an enterprise-wide initiative, the largest impact will be felt on these primary roles: Capability Delivery Manager (CDM), Product Manager, Portfolio Manager, Service Domain

Owner, Service Owner, and Service Manager. The ultimate success will depend on how well the individuals filling those leadership roles understand Product Management, adopt the Product

Management mindset, and ultimately how well they translate it into action. The following purposely generic descriptions will be refined as this effort moves forward:

1. CDMs own the capability roadmap and are responsible for making data driven decisions to drive deliberate actions to accelerate the delivery of quality software to the warfighter. The CDM will posture their team to be highly responsive to their respective customer/end user priorities. Similarly, Service Managers are responsible for providing a specific type of service to support CDMs as needed.

2. Product Managers own the Product Line (PL) roadmap and are responsible for provisioning the

Capability Delivery Teams (CDT) with the resources/support necessary to meet (if not exceed) the customer and end-user expectations. The Product Manager will posture their PL to be highly responsive to the respective customer/end user priorities while charting an actionable path forward to efficiently/effectively meet the customers’ future capability needs. Protects the value generating

CDT from non-value added distractions that hamper their ability to focus on developing and delivering software products/capabilities to end users. Likewise, Service Owners oversee the providing and delivery of a suite of related services in support of Product Line activities.

3. Portfolio Manager (i.e., Business Relations Manager) contributes to the portfolio roadmap and is the primary BES conduit to the corresponding functional Portfolio Manager (PfM) external to BES

(i.e. AF/A1, A4, FM, etc.). Their primary responsibilities include contributing to centralized decisions, removing CDT/CDM/PL impediments occurring at the PfM level, and advocating for

CDT/CDM/PL empowerment and resourcing. Service Domain Owners manage a portfolio of services in support of the activities of the BES Portfolio Managers.

NOTE: There is a separate initiative to incorporate Agile practices throughout BES to the fullest extent possible. It is important that any implementation support is complementary to that effort. Many CDTs have begun the process of transitioning.

III. REQUIREMENTS

A. Core Learning support On-line:

Content applicable to Product Management available to the Government 30 days after award.

B. Core Learning support On-site:

1. Proposed Courses:

a. Product Management Fundamentals

b. Product Management Soft Skills

c. Product Management Workshop

2. Delivery Method: Instructor-led on-site

3. Class Size: no more than 20 students per class

4. Location: The three locations where classes will be conducted are Maxwell AFB-Gunter Annex, AL;

Wright Patterson AFB, OH; and Randolph AFB, TX.

5. Course Materials: Government would like to retain possession of all on-site course materials developed specifically for BES future use by BES training personnel.

6. Notional Schedule: Subject to change as effort progresses

Location # Events Timeframe

Gunter (Discovery) 1 Contract Award + 2 Weeks

Gunter 1 Feb 20

Wright Patterson 1 Feb/Mar 20

Randolph 1 Feb/Mar 20

Gunter 2 Mar/Apr 20

Wright Patterson 2 Mar/Apr 20

Randolph 2 Mar/Apr 20

Gunter 1 3rd Qtr FY20

Wright Patterson 1 3rd Qtr FY20

Randolph 1 3rd Qtr FY20

Table 1. Tentative Event Schedule

C. Experiential Learning: Hands-on engagement with Product Line/Shared Services specific targets of opportunity. Available to the Government 30 days after award.

D. Consultative Support: The consultant(s) will be expected to adjust to the needs of the implementation;

requiring them to seamlessly shift from strategic advisor, pair of helping hands, just-in-time trainer, and coach as the situation dictates. The consultant’s responsibilities can be accomplished either on-site or virtually; however, for planning purposes we estimate 1040 hours (or half a man-year) with 75 percent of the support conducted on-site. Available to the Government 30 days after award.

Periodic Maturity Assessment(s) include(s) four basic components:

a. Periodically analyze the level of Product Management integration achieved by the respective

Product Lines/Shared Services.

b. Based on the Assessment results chart/refine the respective Product Line’s path forward.

c. Evaluating the teaching methods.

d. Measuring improvement over time.