Enterprise AID Application Flowchart

Contexts in source publication

Context 1

... will be shown with this paper's later sections, the February 28 March 8 application effort focused on AID utility in NCSOSE' measurement of current capabilities and, as needed, capability improvement needs. Figure 1 shows Enterprise AID as a two-phased methodology comprising a number of sequential and iterative process steps that respect what developers have determined as concepts essential to the methodology. Disciplines upon which it is conceptually based include systems science [elaborated in 2], test and evaluation [elaborated in 2], and multicriteria decision analysis [elaborated in 3]. ...

Context 2

... considerations built into a procedural scheme for realizing those concepts include those regarding group decision-making, risk, and fuzzy set theory [all elaborated in 1]. The test and evaluation-derived conventions of critical operational issues (COIs), measures of effectiveness (MOEs), and measures of performance (MOPs) are particularly visible in Figure 1; and the report NCSOSE-TR-2012-001 [1] issued one month prior to application prototyping details why they and the balance of AID concepts would prove so significant to a NCSOSE exercise. ...

Context 3

... application facilitators and subject matter experts (SMEs) commenced AID Phase 1, PMS Design, on February 28, 2012. As the methodology phase that most demands participant engagement, Phase 1 continued through the end of the application's fourth day, March 6, and followed the sequence of steps depicted in the "Phase 1" section of Figure 1. This section recounts in step-by-step fashion the most prominent results and conclusions derived from the SME group's facilitated development of a NCSOSE-specific performance measurement system (PMS) evaluation structure by which could be measured their organization's performance against the problem first identified with AID's Step 0. ...

Context 4

... AID's Phase 1 largely comprises what developers have termed the IDeAS process noted earlier with Figure 1. The process includes Steps 1-4c and therefore commences with SME identification of the smallest possible number of COIs they feel will characterize their Step 0-defined problem while respecting AID design calls for "criticality and completeness," "disposition toward action," and "distinctiveness" [1]. ...

Context 5

... of the three sub-steps of developing a HHM, assessing (identifying and analyzing) risks, and translating risks categorized as "high" into the MOEs that would mark Step 2a completion respectively required 1, 3, and 2 ¼ hours of SME activity split across February 28-29. Facilitators required an additional 1 ½ hours to consolidate results near the end of the MOE derivation process; and the derivation session's final half-hour included what participants viewed as a surprisingly advantageous, "on-the-fly" execution of the COI-MOE correspondence check required under AID protocol and depicted with Figure 1. ...

Context 6

... application facilitators commenced AID Phase 2, PMS Deployment, with a March 7th, facilitator-only collection and review of data needed for Step 5a, Evaluate MOPs. Facilitators and SMEs together then pursued on March 8th the entirety of methodology steps depicted in the bottom half of Figure 1 to constitute their effort's second phase. This section recounts the most prominent results and conclusions derived from Phase 2 proceedings. ...