Situation

For decades, engineers and designers have been pushing the boundaries of the design and construction of military aircraft, creating machines that are devastatingly effective. Now, software developers are pushing the limits to keep legacy aircraft relevant and create innovative capabilities. However, the rising cost of software has been a challenge.

Facing strict performance criteria and a need to field new capabilities, an aircraft program needed to improve processes and cut costs to modernize its avionics software. The US Department of Defense asked Kearney to identify and implement a software development process that would reduce costs in areas that were not performing at industry standards.

Approach

Kearney analyzed the processes and costs of a proposed half billion-dollar, software-only modernization effort. This effort involved adding several new tactical capabilities to ensure the success of current and future missions. The project began with an extensive evaluation. In interviews with the prime contractors responsible for modernizing the software, we analyzed the development processes, life cycle, estimation techniques, system components, and software development roles.

From the data collected, we created a detailed component-based model of the system. We evaluated the software effort and cost, the development process, historical productivity, and the technology platforms. The result was a complete bottom-up should-cost model from the subsystem components, including people, processes, and technology. The final model estimated the timing (in hours) for each phase of the software development life cycle. This model created transparency into the development process, targeted the prime contractor and Department of Defense areas for improvement, and streamlined cost negotiations.

Impact and advantage

Our should-cost analysis identified a 15 to 30 percent gap between the current software development process and a targeted approach. From interviews and data audits, we identified improvement areas, such as process handoffs and inefficient testing during the integration phase, and we created action items to reduce hours and costs. A collaborative effort between the military and its contractors improved capabilities at a reduced price—providing value to all parties.