LEADER 03005oam 2200457zu 450 001 9910220099703321 005 20220902154705.0 010 $a0-8330-8673-1 035 $a(CKB)2560000000315366 035 $a(SSID)ssj0001400668 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)12484131 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0001400668 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)11344248 035 $a(PQKB)11211745 035 $a(oapen)doab115343 035 $a(EXLCZ)992560000000315366 100 $a20160829d2014 uh 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurmn|---annan 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 10$aProlonged cycle times and schedule growth in defense acquisition $ea literature review /$fJessie Riposo [et al.] 210 $cRAND Corporation$d2014 210 31$aSanta Monica, CA :$cRand ;$d2014 215 $a1 online resource (xviii, 83 pages) 300 $aBibliographic Level Mode of Issuance: Monograph 311 08$a0-8330-8515-8 330 $aThis report summarizes a selection of the defense acquisition literature from the 1960s to the present on potential sources of prolonged acquisition cycle times and schedule growth, as well as potential opportunities for improvement. It presents the range of possible causes of schedule-related problems and various recommendations cited for improving schedules by various authors and organizations. This report does not provide critical analysis or an assessment of the strengths or weaknesses of the claims made in the literature. Rather, it provides a starting point for further research or consideration by government acquisition professionals, oversight organizations, and the analytic community. We identified the following reasons for schedule delays in the literature: (1) the difficulty of managing technical risk (e.g., program complexity, immature technology, and unanticipated technical issues), (2) initial assumptions or expectations that were difficult to fulfill (e.g., schedule estimates, risk control, requirements, and performance assumptions), and (3) funding instability. The most commonly cited recommendations for reducing cycle time and controlling schedule growth in the literature are strategies that manage or reduce technical risk. Some of those recommendations include using incremental fielding or evolutionary acquisition strategies, developing derivative products (rather than brand-new designs), using mature or proven technology (i.e., commercial, off-the-shelf components), maintaining stable funding, and using atypical contracting vehicles. 606 $aArmed Forces$xProcurement 615 0$aArmed Forces$xProcurement. 676 $a355.6/212 700 $aRiposo$b Jessie$01242193 702 $aMcKernan$b Megan 702 $aDuran$b Chelsea Kaihoi 712 02$aNational Defense Research Institute (U.S.) 801 0$bPQKB 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910220099703321 996 $aProlonged cycle times and schedule growth in defense acquisition$92907483 997 $aUNINA