A Comparative Assessment of the Navy's Future Naval Capabilities (FNC) Process and Joint Staff Capability Gap Assessment Process as Related to Pacific Command's Integrated Priority List Submission

Abstract

This study sought to address whether acquisition is responsive to Combatant Command (COCOM) needs by comparing a responsive system (the Navy's Future Naval Capabilities [FNC] process) to the Joint Staff (JS)/COCOM process, using Pacific Command (PACOM) as an example. Recognizing different end-states ascribed to both processes, we compared the two processes in terms of gap identification and development--common to both. We concluded that while the JS/PACOM system attempts to be responsive, current practices (e.g., informal tracking mechanisms) prevent an authoritative evaluation of responsiveness. We provided key insights into FNC practices that enhance responsiveness and offered recommendations for improving the JS/PACOM process.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Dec 13, 2012
Accession Number
ADA590649

Entities

People

  • Jaime Frittman
  • John Yuhas
  • Sibel Mcgee

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • C4I
  • Engineered Resilient Systems
  • Human Systems
  • Weapons Technologies

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Acquisition
  • Aerial Warfare
  • Business Administration
  • Information Exchange
  • Knowledge Management
  • Lessons Learned
  • Life Cycles
  • Management Personnel
  • Military Research
  • Organizational Structure
  • Systems Engineering
  • Teamwork
  • Training
  • Unified Combatant Commands
  • United States
  • United States Pacific Command
  • Warfare

Readers

  • Defense Acquisition Program Management
  • Joint Military Operations and Doctrine.
  • Maritime and Naval Warfare Studies