1 / 16

The Natick Soldier Center Matthew Hill | Bret Richmond Polina Segalova | David Yoshida

The Natick Soldier Center Matthew Hill | Bret Richmond Polina Segalova | David Yoshida Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering 3 November 2003. Department of Defense. Army. Other Services (Navy, Air Force, etc.). USSOCOM. Army Material Command. RDECOM. Special Operations

keiki
Download Presentation

The Natick Soldier Center Matthew Hill | Bret Richmond Polina Segalova | David Yoshida

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. The Natick Soldier Center Matthew Hill | Bret Richmond Polina Segalova | David Yoshida Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering 3 November 2003

  2. Department of Defense Army Other Services (Navy, Air Force, etc.) USSOCOM Army Material Command RDECOM Special Operations Forces Warrior Protection Natick Soldier Center

  3. Purpose of NSC • To maximize the warrior's survivability, sustainability, mobility, combat effectiveness and quality of life by treating the warrior as a system. • Technology generation • Soldier system generation • Solving field problems • Do not mass produce products

  4. Directorates • Individual protection • Combat feeding • Collective Protection • Airdrop/ Aerial Delivery • Supporting Science and Technology (biotechnology, nanotechnology) • Warrior Systems Technology & Program Integration • Objective Force Warrior

  5. Individual Protection Directorate • Directs Research and Development in: • Chemical/ Biological Protection • Ballistic Protection • Directed Energy Protection • Environmental Protection • Camouflage • Multi-functional Materials

  6. Special Operations Forces (SOF) • 1942 – Army Rangers established • 1952 – Army Green Berets formed • 1962 – Navy SEALs created • USSOCOM established in 1987 • USSOCOM’s role validated in 2001 with operations in Afghanistan

  7. SOF Personnel and Office • SOF office does not report directly to NSC • New and highly flexible organization • SOF Program Manager (PM) is the only civilian PM at NSC • Much financial flexibility due to small volume of products

  8. Strategy • Primary strategy is to “deliver good stuff” to their customers • Take risks – ask for forgiveness, not permission • Value of their reputation is increased by: • Designing high quality products • “Making it right” when they make mistakes

  9. “What do we produce? Results.”–Fred Chan • Unlike other directorates, all ideas come from the field, not the lab • All manufacturing is out-sourced • Turn-around time of 2-8 months vs. 4-6 years for rest of military • Full process management

  10. Production Process • Field & Evaluate request • Find or Design a Solution. Off-the-shelf is preferred. • Source vendors for cost and speed • Guide vendors in transition to production • Follow-up with field users

  11. Marketing • Differentiation • Emphasis on speed and results • Higher individual autonomy • Closer link to the customers • Competitors • Other government agencies • Private sector companies • Marketing Strategy • Minimal advertisement, mostly word or mouth and reputation • “If you build it, they will come.”

  12. Finances • Funded by DOD (~$2 million). • Additional funding from special program budget allocations and directorates (~$38 million). • Competes with private sector defense contractors and other DOD research facilities for 95% of its budget

  13. Finances - Distribution • $2 million Operations and Maintenance budget supports 9 staff members and capital improvements • $.5 million RDTE budget enables development of commercial and off the shelf products • $37.5 Million procurement budget funds the actual purchasing of all developed equipment

  14. Finances - Budgeting • Requests are planned out for five years into the future • Every two years the budget is reviewed and finalized • Budget approval comes from up the chain of command, ultimately receiving congressional approval • Budgeting received only covers Operation and Maintenance expenses

  15. Conclusion • SOF Group represents a new wave in military organization to respond to the need for a dynamic, lean, and productive military. • Though entrepreneurial internally, application of its methodology to other parts of the military and to SOF’s own role in the military is needed.

  16. Thank you • Dianne St. Jean • Fred Chan • Michelle Poirier • Dick Brown • Natick Soldier Center Staff

More Related