Lack of capabilities management can limit the short and long-term development of any Navy.

PERISCOPE24 offers the following services based on the JCIDS approach:

Navy/joint capability requirements portfolio management;
Review of the Navy/joint capability requirements documents;
Validation of the Navy/joint capability requirements documents;
Maritime gap capabilities analysis;
Capability requirements documents generation;
CONOPS's analysis and writing;
Tasks list portfolio management.
The following diagram provides an integrating construct for articulating the dependencies between capability requirements as well as the traceabilities between related processes and activities.

STEP 1

National and military strategies and guidance influences military operations, intelligence activities, development and validation of capability requirements, acquisition activities, and DOTmLPF-P associated with organizing, training, and equipping forces.

STEP 2

Current and planned operations, as well as other roles, missions, and functions which direct an ability to perform certain activities, are the most direct driver of capability requirements, in the context of the strategic guidance and threats/intelligence.

STEP 3

The force element providers organize, train and equipelements using the materiel and non-materiel capability solutions available to provide ready forces. Readiness reporting data of the force elements should be provided in near real time.

STEP 4

Intelligence activities identify and quantify threats which may drive or impact military operations, and the level of effectiveness needed to perform the tasks, thus inform the setting of performance levels in capability requirements. The need to collect intelligence also drives capability requirements, often worked collaboratively between military and intelligence requirements processes when there are shared equities in the intelligence gathering capabilities.

STEP 5

An organization’s operations, roles, missions, or functions can be organized in terms of the top level mission areas. Roles, missions, or functions, may be further decomposed into lower levels of the tasks. These lower level decomposition express the activities in terms of operational capabilities required to accomplish the activity.

STEP 6

Next step is to review and validate proposed new capability requirements and to perform periodic assessments of the capability requirement portfolios. Validated capability requirements which lack a materiel or non-materiel capability solution may be recommended for developing a capability solution to mitigate the operational risk associated with the capability gap.

STEP 7

There is generally a many-to-many mapping between validated capability requirements and capability solutions, requiring both materiel and
non-materiel solutions to address a single requirement. A single multifunction system, with its associated DOTmLPF-P enablers, may also address
many capability requirements across multiple capability requirement portfolios.

STEP 8

Only once the current and planned capability solutions – materiel and/or non-materiel – are compared to the capability requirements, can a Sponsor identify
whether or not there is a capability gap.

STEP 9

Execution of the processes or activities in the other all areas requires appropriate funding, which is organized into Main Force Program categories, and – Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E), Procurement, Operations and Maintenance, Military Personnel, and Military Construction.
The best justified justification for resources is to by being able to articulate the interactions and traceability between each area of the process, and how the
resources downgrade risk in capability, quantity, and/or readiness under specific mission/threat conditions.