全球智库信息集成服务系统

A Framework for Assessing Interoperability Policy

• The first step in assessing interoperability policy is to identify and examine guidance that governs the roles, responsibilities, and authorities pertinent to the issue being investigated.
• Next, the relevant passages that are identified are diagrammed as a citation of source of authority, a set of caveats governing application of the guidance, and identification of a party with authority to issue policy.
• By placing the citations, caveats, and parties with authority together into a single framework, researchers can generate a comprehensive roles and responsibilities network of authorities pertaining to the issue being investigated.
• Researchers can then analyze the network, evaluating and comparing the scopes of authority for all executives identified as parties with authority, noting any gaps or overlaps.

Case Study: Authority to Issue Navy Interoperability Policy Related to Mission Area Systems Engineering (MASE)

• There are 13 different paths of authority that could be cited by four different parties to claim authority to influence Navy interoperability policy related to MASE: Four of these paths place this authority with the Secretary of the Navy (SECNAV), four place it with the Department of the Navy Chief Information Officer, three place it with the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition (ASN[RD&A]), and two place it with the ASN(RD&A) Chief Systems Engineer (ASN[RD&A] CHSENG).
• The three paths available directly to the ASN(RD&A) and one of the paths available to the SECNAV give the ASN(RD&A) CHSENG an indirect but pivotal role in influencing MASE policy.

Achieving interoperability among systems is instrumental to enabling critical functions, such as timely information exchange during operations and efficiencies in acquisition, so it is important to understand what parties have authority to issue policy that governs the facets of interoperability. This report presents an approach and framework for determining what parties have authority to issue interoperability policy, the legal and policy origins and implementation paths of the authority, and the extent of the authority. The approach includes rigorous analysis by researchers to identify pertinent authorities in federal law supplemented by a means to facilitate discovery of roles and responsibilities in Department of Defense and Service-level policies. The approach results in a roles and responsibilities network that traces the paths of authority available to issue interoperability policy. The authors use as a case study the authority of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Research, Development, and Acquisition, Chief Systems Engineer to issue Navy interoperability policy related to mission area systems engineering (MASE) to demonstrate the use of the framework and methodology. They find that there are 13 different paths of authority that could be cited by four different parties to claim authority to influence interoperability policy related to MASE. The approach used in this report might be developed, along with complementary analytic techniques, to provide the government with the ability to create and maintain consistent and comprehensive bodies of policy that will ensure the effective and efficient operation of defense agencies.

• Chapter One

  Introduction

• Chapter Two

  Framework and Methodology

• Chapter Three

  Analysis of Authority to Issue Navy Interoperability Policy

• Chapter Four

  ASN(RD&A) CHSEN G Case Study

• Chapter Five

  Recommendations and Closing Remarks

• Appendix A

  Electronic Policy Improvement Capability (EPIC)

• Appendix B

  Statements of Authority

• Appendix C

  Authority of Other Officials