In this blog, I wish to illustrate the vertical dimensions in the broad architecture I have been explaining in the last five blogs on a Defence Capability Framework - (01) to (05). Why is this "vertical" dimension so important? Well, if you are able to navigate or trace up and down within the same dimension (requirement, solution or process), then you get a very real insight into the whole "architecture" of the organisation, in this case the Australian Department of Defence. ....read more

It has been a while since I blogged. I have been a bit busy with a few things, among them a proposal for one of our other business interests - Mantra Training and Development - a Registered Training Organisation (RTO). So, just to provide a little context, this blog is a continuation of the "Defence Capability Framework" series. The last two were on the Operational level and the Strategic level. This one has a focus on the System level within the Australian Defence context.  ....read more

The operational level is much more defined than the strategic level. But ...there is limited use of the concept of FIC (Fundamentals Inputs to Capability) in the capability context (I will explain FIC later). FIC is used mainly in the "preparedness" context. Which is a shame really, because the data actually exists, it just isn't used, yet it could be so useful in the capability development context.  ....read more

The strategic level is a bit of an enigma in the Defence environment. The strategic terminologies are used frequently and there is much discussion around strategic subjects and many presentations made. But .....there is rarely a sort of "rubber on the road" approach where the end result of all those discussions and papers and presentations is placed into a database to evolve as the Defence Force evolves. I capture some of these issues below.

The horizontal dimension is about understanding the basics of how an effort to change an organisation needs to progress (see Organisational Program Framework (01)). Just to remind you I have repeated the "3 Spaces" below.

In this series of blogs, I wish to continue my discussion around the Project Knowledge Model (PKM) big picture, into what I have called the Organisational Program Framework or Organisational Portfolio Framework. But this time in a context - the Australian Defence context. Hopefully, it is then relatively easy to place this into any other government or corporate context. If you wish to see the generic view of this approach please go to Organisational Program Framework (01), Organisational Program Framework (02) and Organisational Program Framework (03).

Now I need to combine these vertical and horizontal dimensions. If we do that we get this three dimensional look.

Continuing on from Organisational Program Framework (01). The next dimension, the horizontal dimension, is about understanding the basics of how an effort to change an organisation needs to progress. I have touched directly on this in my previous blogs at Project Knowledge Sectors (01), Project Knowledge Sectors (02), and The Business Plan and Projects. So I need to return to the knowledge sectors idea to explain the horizontal dimension.

Rich, B.R. and Janos, Y., Skunk Works, Little Brown and Company, New York, 1994

I have had this book in my library for quite some time and although I've browsed it before, I recently had the opportunity to actually read it. Why I didn't read it earlier, I just don't know because it is just so full of stories and wisdom on many levels.

For those who don't know - the Skunk Works were (are still?) a top secret Lockheed shop for the design, development and manufacture of advanced and innovative aerospace systems.

I wish to take some previous blogs on my Project Knowledge Model (PKM) further, specifically the blogs at Project Knowledge Sectors (01), Project Knowledge Sectors (02), and The Business Plan and Projects. This is about understanding the big picture and how the program concepts can "flow" ..... horizontally and vertically.