Modifying the X-Matrix to Capture the Joint Capability Architecture

Enos, James R.

doi:10.1016/j.procs.2014.03.012

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In Section 1, we reviewed five capability model types proposed by Anteroinen 9 and how the capability model types are linked based on Park et al.’s 16 and Enos's 17 studies and the JDARTS analysis tool 23 . Figure 2 suggests a high‐level data model, which represents abstractions of capability definition problem.…”

Section: Methodology – Systems Approach and Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The US Joint Capability Areas JCA, 8,16,17 NATO capability codes NCC 18 Textual Effect or a function to execute tasks…”

Section: Capability Model Representation Capability Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These functional capability models are used in CBP approaches to avoid a potential bias to a particular capability solution and to develop solutions suitable for a wide range of operations in different geographical locations 1,2,4 . The US Joint Capability Areas (JCA) 8,16,17 and NATO capability codes (NCC) 18 are examples of predefined functional capability taxonomies. Additionally, the Finnish Defence Forces’ capability model 13 has a functional capability model and utilizes a nationalized version of the JCA taxonomy, and the latest version 14 uses the NCC taxonomy to support the definition of functional capabilities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Enos 17 proposed a modification of the X‐Matrix enterprise architecture tool to support high‐level resourcing decisions in capability development. The X‐Matrix connects the capability development programs, functional capabilities (JCA), and tasks (UTJL).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Park et al.’s framework, 16 the Enos’ matrix, 17 the logic of the JDARTS planning tool, 23 and SEBoK model 28 connect the other capability model categories defined by Anteroinen, 9 except for the “military capability as an instrument of foreign policy.” The category “capability as fighting power through military units” is not explicitly included in the Enos’ matrix. In Park et al.’s framework, the military unit is implicitly presented as the systems and resources.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Conceptual model for capability planning in a military context – A systems thinking approach

Koivisto

Ritala

Vilkko

2022

Systems Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During recent decades, planning defense systems have evolved into capability-based planning (CBP) processes. This paper seeks to answer two questions: firstly, how to express a complex, real-world capability requirement; and secondly, how to assess if a system with interacting elements fulfills this requirement. We propose that both a capability need and the solution fulfilling it are expressed with a consistent set of models in a traceable manner. The models integrate current capability models, specific to planning level and capability viewpoint, with systems thinking approach. Our conceptual model defines the defense system in its environment, our data model defines and organizes the CBP terms, and our class diagram defines the CBP planning elements. We illustrate the approach by giving an example of capability parametrization and compare it both with the DODAF capability view and with the generic CBP process. Our data model describes how capabilities are degraded in action and extends the approach toward capability dynamics. The quantitative capability definition aims to support efforts to solve for real world interacting subsystems that combined implement the required capability.

show abstract

Section: Methodology – Systems Approach and Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The US Joint Capability Areas JCA, 8,16,17 NATO capability codes NCC 18 Textual Effect or a function to execute tasks…”

Section: Capability Model Representation Capability Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%