Booz Allen Hamilton and Market Connections: C4ISR Survey Report

© 2016 Market Connections, Inc.
Booz Allen Hamilton
C4ISR Survey Summary Report
January 2016

BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON C4ISR SURVEY REPORT | MARKET CONNECTIONS, INC. | WWW.MARKETCONNECTIONSINC.COM
Contents
CONTENTS 2
Executive Summary …………………………………………..….………….............................. 3
Assessing Today’s C4ISR Challenges and Concerns………………….……..………........ 4
Priorities for Implementation..………………………………………….………………………….. 10
Integrated C4ISR Through Enterprise Integration………………………………………….. 12
The Five Main Features of Integrated C4ISR………………………………………………….. 16
Objectives & Methodology…………..................................................................... 32
About Us……….................................................................................................... 37

Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
• Booz Allen Hamilton partnered with government market research firm Market Connections,
Inc. to assess the challenges the military faces with C4ISR and receptivity to an Enterprise
Integration approach to address their concerns and challenges.
• More than half of survey respondents saw interoperability across military organizations as a
problem that cannot be solved without the true integration and networking of C4ISR. They
also indicated an integrated approach to C4ISR would benefit their organizations.
• Survey respondents cited process and budget as the top challenges of working with legacy
C4ISR systems. The technology challenges respondents face are primarily related to
cybersecurity modernization and technology insertion concerns.
• The concept of Integrated C4ISR through Enterprise Integration especially resonates with the
Air Force. Almost three quarters of Air Force survey respondents indicated Enterprise
Integration would benefit them, versus just over half of total respondents.
• Two-thirds of respondents agree:
o Incremental delivery of modular systems with integrated capabilities can enable rapid insertion of new
technologies (65%).
o Designed-in cybersecurity that infuses solutions with organic unified and multi-layered defense can
strengthen cybersecurity because interoperability will be designed into systems from the beginning (64%).
o Government-owned, open architectures and standardized interfaces can allow a “plug and play”
environment that will give wider access to commercial technologies (64%).

Assessing Today’s C4ISR
Challenges and Concerns

ASSESSING TODAY’S CHALLENGES AND CONCERNS 5
There are a variety of challenges and concerns military professionals face when working with traditional C4ISR systems. Please indicate on a scale of 1 to 5, how
challenging the following issues are to your organization.

Operational and Cultural Challenges
There are a variety of operational and cultural challenges and concerns military professionals face when working with traditional C4ISR systems. Please indicate on a
scale of 1 to 5, how challenging the following issues are to your organization.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Ability to manage collected data
Systems are not user friendly
Keep pace with threats
Information-sharing and
interfaces among contractors
Lack of interoperability
Ability to connect anytime,
anywhere to a network
Stove-piped or
standalone systems
Sufficient bandwidth to exchange
data and information
8%
6%
8%
6%
6%
7%
7%
8%
17%
14%
10%
13%
13%
13%
8%
10%
36%
36%
36%
34%
35%
32%
34%
30%
26%
30%
30%
28%
26%
27%
30%
31%
14%
14%
15%
18%
20%
20%
21%
21%
1 – Not at all challenging 2 3 4 5- Very challenging Average
3.49
3.50
3.40
3.42
3.40
3.33
3.34
3.22
• Over half of all respondents indicate sufficient bandwidth to exchange data and information and
stove-piped or standalone systems are challenging operational issues in their organization when
working with traditional C4ISR systems.

Process and Budgetary Challenges
There are also a variety of process and budgetary challenges and concerns military professionals encounter when working with traditional C4ISR systems. Please
indicate on a scale of 1 to 5, how challenging the following issues are to your organization.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Changing procurement rules and
requirements
Lifecycle sustainment costs
Complicated acquisition process
Long acquisition process
Lack of funding/budgetary
constraints
4%
5%
4%
4%
5%
10%
8%
6%
7%
6%
32%
29%
29%
28%
27%
32%
32%
30%
28%
28%
22%
26%
30%
33%
34%
3.79
3.80
3.75
3.66
3.57
• Lack of funding/budgetary constraints and a long acquisition process are the top budgetary and
process challenges respondents encounter when working with traditional C4ISR systems.

Technology Challenges
Finally, there are often technology challenges and concerns military professionals encounter when working with traditional C4ISR systems. Please indicate on a scale of
1 to 5, how challenging the following issues are to your organization.
• The majority of respondents indicate cybersecurity threats are challenging for their organization.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Systems are obsolete by the time
they reach the warfighter
Streamlining systems
development
Limited ability to modernize or
insert new technologies
Improving security to protect
from cyber threats
Cybersecurity threats
10%
6%
6%
6%
8%
10%
12%
10%
14%
11%
29%
37%
32%
32%
26%
35%
29%
34%
28%
29%
16%
16%
18%
20%
26%
3.56
3.44
3.49
3.38
3.38

Challenge Differences by Military Branch
There are a variety of challenges and concerns military professionals face when working with traditional C4ISR systems. Please indicate on a scale of 1 to 5, how
challenging the following issues are to your organization.
• Air Force and Navy/Marines respondents indicate streamlining systems development is
challenging significantly more than other DoD respondents.
• Navy/Marines respondents indicate establishing and agreeing upon open, common and standard
architecture and ability to effectively serve warfighter needs is challenging significantly more than
other respondents.
Average
(1=Not at all challenging,
5=Very challenging)
Total Air Force Army
Navy/
Marines
Other DoD
Technology Challenge
Streamlining systems development 3.38 3.53 3.28 3.59 2.89
Process Challenge
Establishing and agreeing upon open,
common and standard architectures
3.32 3.39 3.06 3.67 3.25
Operational Challenge
Ability to effectively serve warfighter
needs
3.20 3.30 2.99 3.48 3.00
= statistically significant difference

Priorities for
Implementation

PRIORITIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION 11
Related to C4ISR, which of the following initiatives are a priority for implementation within your organization in the next 12 months?

Integrated C4ISR Through
Enterprise Integration

13
For the remainder of the survey, respondents kept in mind the following high-level description summarizing
the key points of a C4ISR solution being offered to the military by a major government contracting firm. The
intentof the C4ISR solution is to address the issues facing the defense acquisition community when
designing, buying and implementingC4ISR capabilities.
New Concept: Integrated C4ISR through Enterprise Integration
Until recently, many C4ISR systems were designed to meet specific mission requirements, but did not take into
consideration the ability to share information or interoperate seamlessly with systems outside of their mission
space. As opportunities and requirements for collaboration grew, these systems were expanded and modified
after they were built and fielded, typically with proprietary technology.
Warfighters and the organizations that support them need “Integrated C4ISR,” in which the individual pieces
are designed as part of an enterprise system from the start. Integrated C4ISR is distinguished by five major
features:
• Government-owned, open architectures and standardized interfaces
• Agile, incremental delivery of modular systems with integrated capabilities
• Collective forums that bring together operators, acquisition professionals, and engineers to support agile
development of solutions that are tailored to operational and technical requirements
• Designed-in cybersecurity to infuse solutions with organic, unified, and multilayered defense
• Enterprise-oriented culture
A major government contractor is positioned to help military organizations develop and field Integrated C4ISR
through Enterprise Integration by enhancing and linking capabilities in three primary disciplines: 1)
engineering; 2) strategic and tactical operations; and 3) acquisition policies and processes.
INTEGRATED C4ISR THROUGH ENTERPRISE INTEGRATION
Introduction of the Concept

2%
8%
36%
32%
22%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
1 - Not at all
beneficial
2
3
4
5 - Very
beneficial
Concept Resonates as Beneficial to
Organization
14
Concept Resonates as Beneficial
INTEGRATED C4ISR THROUGH ENTERPRISE INTEGRATION
Though the description of the Integrated C4ISR offering is brief and high-level,we are looking for your top-of-mind reaction to the concept. To what extent does this
concept resonate with you as something that could benefit your organization?
• Over half of all respondents indicate the concept resonates as something that could benefit their
organization.
• Air Force respondents indicate the concept resonates as beneficial significantly more than other
respondents.
= statistically significant difference
Overall
Average
Air Force Army
Navy/
Marines
Other DoD
3.66 3.95 3.54 3.59 3.36
54%

15INTEGRATED C4ISR THROUGH ENTERPRISE INTEGRATION
The description of the Integrated C4ISR offering above refers to “the limits of the current C4ISR design with regard to interoperability with systems beyond a command’s
own mission space.” Do you see interoperability across military organizations as…

The Five Main Features of
Integrated C4ISR Through
Enterprise Integration

17
The following descriptions summarizing the five major features of Integrated C4ISR through
Enterprise Integration were provided with each set of questions regarding the respective feature:
Government-owned, open architecturesand standardized interfaces. Government and military organizations
will shift away from proprietary, vendor-owned C4ISR systems to a truly open architecture that is simpler,
modular, standards-based, common and shared and government-owned to ensure system interoperability and
data integration. In integrated C4ISR, the government will own the architecture, the system, and the data.
Agile, incremental delivery of modular systems with integratedcapabilities. Military organizations will shift
away from the acquisition approach in which large systems are delivered all at once, after years of development.
Instead, they will acquire smaller, modular systems with common interface specifications delivered incrementally
by the full industry base and inject new innovations into the integrated C4ISR solution as soon as they are
invented.
Collective forums that bring togetheroperators, acquisition professionalsand engineers to support agile
development of solutions that are tailored to operational and technical requirements. Stakeholders from the
technology and engineering realm can bring in their solutions to a laboratory environment to evaluate how well
they interoperate with existing C4ISR platforms, assess how well they meet the real-world operational needs of
warfighters and determine the best options for maintaining quality standards while rapidly fielding the
capabilities.
Designed-in cybersecurity to infuse solutions with organic, unified and multi-layereddefense. Early engagement
of security issues in the design process, along with control over security standards and interfaces, will enable
system developers to make cybersecurity an organic feature of each networked system.
Enterprise-oriented culture. In an enterprise-oriented culture, stakeholders do not think of their roles simply
from a functional perspective (i.e., as a technologist, or an operator and an acquisition professional), but also
from an enterprise perspective that moves them from a siloed view of the issues to networked decision making.
THE FIVE MAIN FEATURES OF INTEGRATED C4ISR THROUGH ENTERPRISE INTEGRATION
The Five Main Features

2%
6%
41%
34%
17%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1 - Low utility
2
3
4
5 - High utility
Would Provide Utility to the Organization
Government-Owned, Open Architectures and
Standardized Interfaces
THE FIVE MAIN FEATURES OF INTEGRATED C4ISR THROUGH ENTERPRISE INTEGRATION 18
To what extent would the feature of government-owned,open architectures and standardized interfaces provide utility to your organization?
• Over half of all respondents indicate the feature of government-owned, open architectures and
standardized interfaces would provide utility to their organization.
51%

To what extent do you agree with the following statements as it pertains to government-owned,open architectures and standardized interfaces?

Agile, Incremental Delivery of Modular Systems
with Integrated Capabilities
To what extent would the feature of agile, incremental delivery of modular systems with integrated capabilities provide utility to your organization?
• Over half of all respondents indicate the feature of agile, incremental delivery of modular systems
with integrated capabilities would provide utility to their organization.
2%
4%
39%
36%
18%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1 - Low utility
2
3
4
5 - High utility
Overall
Average
3.64
54%

To what extent do you agree with the following statements as it pertains to agile, incremental delivery of modular systems with integrated capabilities?

Collective Forums of Operators, Acquisition
Professionals and Engineers
To what extent would the feature of collective forums provide utility to your organization?
• Half of all respondents indicate the feature of collective forums would provide utility to their
organization.
1%
8%
40%
36%
15%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
1 - Low utility
2
3
4
5 - High utility
51%
Overall
Average
3.53

Collective Forums Can…
To what extent do you agree with the following statements as it pertains to collective forums of operators,acquisition professionals and engineers?
• Nearly two-thirds of all respondents agree collective forums can help develop and field systems
that improve situational awareness and decision making to give warfighters unmatched
superiority over current and future threats.
• Air Force respondents agree collective forums can enhance delivery of innovation to the US
warfighters’ technological advantage significantly more than other respondents.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Enhance delivery of innovation to US warfighters’
technological advantage
Help develop and field systems that improve situational
awareness and decision making to give warfighters
unmatched superiority over current
and future threats
2%
3%
8%
7%
30%
28%
36%
37%
24%
25%
Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree or disagree Somewhat agree Strongly agree % Agree
62%
60%
*
Enhance Delivery of Innovation to US Warfighters'
Technological Advantage
Overall Average
(1=Strongly Disagree,
5=Strongly Agree)
Air Force Army
Navy/
Marines
Other
DoD
3.73 4.01 3.66 3.54 3.54 = statistically significant difference

Designed-In Cybersecurity to Infuse Solutions
with Organic, Unified, and Multi-Layered Defense
To what extent would the feature of designed-in cybersecurity provide utility to your organization?
• Over half of all respondents indicate the feature of designed-in cybersecurity would provide utility
to their organization.
4%
6%
33%
33%
25%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
1 - Low utility
2
3
4
5 - High utility
Overall
Average
3.70
58%

To what extent do you agree with the following statements as it pertains to designed-in cybersecurity to infuse solutions with organic, unified, and multi-layered
defense?

Enterprise-Oriented Culture
To what extent would the feature of enterprise-oriented culture provide utility to your organization?
• Nearly half of all respondents indicate the feature of enterprise-oriented culture would provide
utility to their organization.
4%
9%
38%
33%
15%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
1 - Low utility
2
3
4
5 - High utility
Overall
Average
3.45
48%

Enterprise-Oriented Cultures Can…
To what extent do you agree with the following statements as it pertains to enterprise-oriented culture?
• Two-thirds of all respondents agree enterprise oriented cultures can strengthen collaboration
among intelligence teams and warfighting units.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Provide greater stakeholder collaboration vertically
across strategic, operational and tactical levels
Provide greater stakeholder collaboration
horizontally across the joint services
Improve prioritization of requirements to ensure
that cross-organizational needs are met
Strengthen collaboration among intelligence
teams and warfighting units
1%
1%
2%
2%
7%
7%
4%
2%
38%
34%
36%
31%
40%
42%
41%
44%
16%
16%
17%
22%
Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree or disagree Somewhat agree Strongly agree % Agree
66%
58%
58%
56%

Most Resonating Feature
Which ONE of the five major concept features resonate with you the most?
• Overall, collective forums resonate most with respondents.
8%
6%
14%
22%
22%
28%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
None of the five resonate with me
Enterprise-oriented culture
Designed-in cybersecurity to infuse solutions with organic,
unified, and multilayered defense
Agile, incremental delivery of modular systems with
integrated capabilities
Government-owned, open architectures and standardized
interfaces
Collective forums

Objectives and
Methodology

Objectives and Methodology
33
The main objectives for the Booz Allen Hamilton C4ISR Online Survey were to gather
data from defense decision-makers and influencers to quantify agency challenges and
priorities regarding C4ISR.
From April 22 – May 13, 2015, 250 defense decision makers participated in an online
survey that averaged 15 minutes in length
Throughout the report, notable significant differences are reported.
The margin of error is +/- 6% at a 95% confidence level
Due to rounding, graphs may not add to 100%
OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

11%
23%
31%
35%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Other Department of Defense agency
Department of the Navy -
including the Marine Corps
Department of the Air Force
Department of the Army
Includes:OSD, DCAA, DLA,
DTRA, JCS, NSA, DFAS
DISA, DARPA
RESPONDENT CLASSIFICATIONS 34
Please verify the organization in the military you work for:
Military Organizations Represented
• A variety of defense organizations are represented in the sample, with most respondents
working for the Department of the Army.

Contractor Selection and Management Involvement
35RESPONDENT CLASSIFICATIONS
23%
45%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Executive-level oversight of
programs or projects
Management of
contractors/consultants on
programs or projects
Routine interaction to
accomplish work
Involvement in Managing Contractors
Once Hired
5%
16%
20%
26%
27%
56%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Final approval of firms
Approval of acquisition strategy
or program milestones
Recommend firms and/or bids
Develop contract requirements
Evaluate firms and/or bids
Develop operational
requirements
Involvement in Selecting Contractors
Note: Multiple responsesallowed
In which of the following ways are you or have you been involved in your organization's selection of governmentcontractor firms that provide C4ISR (command,control,
communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) solutions?
In which of the following ways are you or have ever you been involved in your organization's managementof government contractor firms that provide C4ISR services
once the firm has been hired by your organization?
• If a respondent did not have any involvement with selecting or managing government
contractor firms that provide C4ISR solutions, the survey was terminated.

7%
2%
2%
3%
4%
4%
5%
10%
11%
13%
16%
21%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Other
Acquisition
Purchasing/Contracting
Human Capital
Finance and Budget
Security Operations
IT/MIS/IRM
Program Management/Execution
Logistics Management
Engineering
Executive Management/Command
Operations/Administration
RESPONDENT CLASSIFICATIONS 36
Which of the following best describes your role in your organization?
Job Role
• A variety of job roles are represented in the sample, with respondents most often describing
their role as operations/administration.
Examples:
Investigator,Legal,
Combat Force
Development,
Management,
OrganizationalDesign

About Us

38
About Booz Allen Hamilton
Booz Allen Hamilton has been at the forefront of strategy, technology and engineering for more
than 100 years. Booz Allen partners with public and private sector clients across the globe to
solve their most difficult challenges.
Booz Allen provides an agile and open set of situational awareness tools and transformative
solutions to help federal agencies and departments integrate data, systems and people across
the enterprise for mission success. Through deep and holistic expertise rooted in network-
centric warfare, Booz Allen allows the government to meet their cross-organizational C4ISR
needs and drive out inefficiencies while optimizing cost-effectiveness. To learn more, visit
www.boozallen.com/C4ISR.
About Market Connections, Inc.
Market Connections delivers actionable intelligence and insights that enable improved business
performance and positioning for leading businesses, trade associations and the public sector.
The custom market research firm is a sought-after authority on preferences, perceptions and
trends among the public sector and the contractors who serve them, offering deep domain
expertise in information technology and telecommunications, health care and education. For
more information visit www.marketconnectionsinc.com.
ABOUT US

MARKET CONNECTIONS, INC. | 703-378-2025| WWW.MARKETCONNECTIONSINC.COM
Laurie Morrow, Research Director
703-378-2025 ext. 101
lauriem@marketconnectionsinc.com
Monica Mayk, Vice President of Client Services
703-378-2025 ext. 107
monicam@marketconnectionsinc.com
11350 Random Hills Road, Suite 800 | Fairfax, VA 22030 | 703-378-2025
www.marketconnectionsinc.com
39CONTACT INFORMATION

Booz Allen Hamilton and Market Connections: C4ISR Survey Report

Booz Allen Hamilton and Market Connections: C4ISR Survey Report

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to Booz Allen Hamilton and Market Connections: C4ISR Survey Report

More from Booz Allen Hamilton

Recently uploaded

Booz Allen Hamilton and Market Connections: C4ISR Survey Report