This paper summarizes the results of an experimental evaluation conducted to assess the Capability Engineering approach developed for the Canadian Forces/Department of National Defence to facilitate decision-making on strategic investments and divestments. This work was performed as part of the Collaborative Capability Definition, Engineering and Management Technology Demonstration Project (CapDEM TDP). Based on the systems engineering paradigm, the approach is articulated around three axes: People, Process and Materiel. The focus of this paper is on the lessons learned from Exercise Gamma, the last of three validation exercises which are part of an evaluation strategy attempting to evolve Capability Engineering from theory into practice. Lessons learned have helped to identify specific improvements as well as critical success factors for the implementation and application of Capability Engineering. Close Next BackgroundAn important part of CapDEM consists of defining and refining a Capability Engineering Process (CEP) ). The process aims at closing the gap between the CBP and the platform/system acquisition process. It aims at improving capability acquisition by scaling up System Engineering to a capability level; in particular, scaling the necessary rigor for better strategic investment/divestment decision-making regarding a capability. The process was built from standards such as the Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF), ISO/IEC 15288 and IEEE 1220. DoDAF was selected as the most complete description of architectural products, the ISO/IEC 15288 was used as the process reference model 2 , and IEEE 1220 was used as a baseline to detail the engineering technical processes. In addition, the CEP enforces the usage of a spiral approach, which is becoming an increasingly common engineering practice.Application of the CEP provides a set of options for addressing a given capability gap. Each option involves a two-part solution (an operational architecture and an SoS architecture) and addresses six organizational components:Personnel, R&D, Infrastructure, Concepts, Information Management, and Equipment (known as PRICIE components). The two-part solution is complemented with estimated cost, risk and schedule to form a comprehensive option. The process incrementally produces the following deliverables (initially produced in sequence and then modified in parallel): Requirements Baseline, Operational Architecture, SoS Architecture, and Investment Options. Execution of the four CEP stages (Inception, Comprehension, Elaboration and Completion) is controlled through the use of gates.Although the Capability Engineering Process is a primary focus of CapDEM, it is recognized that the process alone does not generate a successful capability roadmap. In particular, a design team which applies the process (the People Axis), and a technological infrastructure which facilitates its development and execution (the Materiel Axis), both play fundamental roles. The People Axis investigates the concept of a cross-functional, ...

Abstract. For over four years, Defence R&D Canada has been investigating Capability Engineering, which aims at supporting the Capability-Based Planning (CBP) decision-making process, under the Collaborative Capability Definition Engineering and Management Technology Demonstration (CapDEM TD) project. Based on the systems engineering paradigm, the approach is articulated around three axes: People, Process and Materiel. This paper presents the results of an experimental evaluation conducted to assess the CapDEM approach to Capability Engineering. The focus is on the lessons learned from Exercise Beta, the second of three validation exercises which are part of an evaluation strategy attempting to evolve capability engineering from theory into practice.

Abstract. The current paper summarizes the Capability Engineering Process (CEP) being developed to help decision making on strategic investments and divestments for the Canadian Forces and Department of National Defence. This effort is part of a technology demonstration effort called the Collaborative, Capability, Definition, Engineering and Management (CapDEM). The CEP introduces ways to increase strategic agility capability management in a world in constant evolution. A CEP application provides a set of options addressing a given capability gap. Among benefits, this process: (1) provides decision makers with timely strategic information through an iterative and incremental approach; (2) reduces time spent on unrealistic options by continuously pruning the solution space as early as possible; (3) provides operationally acceptable strategic options with direct involvement of the operational community into the solution development; and (4) provides feasible options by ensuring commitment and participation in developing solutions involving all of the organization's functional components: Personnel, R&D, Infrastructure, Concept development, Information management, and Equipment (known as PRICIE components in Canada).

The Collaborative Capability Definition Engineering and Management Technology Demonstration (CapDEM TD) project is investigating Capability Engineering (CE) in order to support the Capability‐Based Planning (CBP) decision‐making process. This paper presents the evaluation effort being applied to the Capability Engineering approach, a methodology based on the systems engineering paradigm and articulated around three axes: People, Process and Materiel. Originating from the laboratories of Defence R&D Canada, the CapDEM effort is now evolving from theory into practice, based on an on‐going evaluation strategy concretely realized via three validation exercises that consist of realistic simulations of people applying the process and materiel to resolve capability gaps. This paper details the evaluation strategy and includes lessons learned from the first and second validation exercises. The tenets and expectations from the final exercises will form the final part of the paper, with the intent of providing insight into the advancement of capability engineering.

Abstract. This paper presents the approach used to investigate the potential of process patterns to increase the level of agility of engineering processes applied to military capabilities or system of systems. This effort is a follow-up of the Canadian Capability Engineering Process (CEP) defined during the Collaborative, Capability, Definition, Engineering and Management (CapDEM) technology demonstration project. The challenges surrounding process assessment are investigated.