(

\

Using PSL/PSA toModel Information System Planning forThe United StatesDepartment of the Army Headqarters

Paul D. McDaniel10180 Bessmer Lane, Fail-fax, Vil-ginia, 22032, USA

Phone: (103) 918-2488

Headquarters, united states ArmyDeputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

ABSTRACT: The US Army first adopted information s¥stem planningtechniques in the early 1980s. What has evolved ~s a complexautomated model of the functions, classes of information,systems, data flow, organizational responsibility, and theirinterrelationships. The intent of this paper is not to explainthe methodology used in this model but to demonstrate the use ofa modern, second generation CASE tool (PSLjPSA) in itsimplementation.

This is an information model of a portion of a large militaryorganization. However, these tools and methods should aid anylarge or~anization to better understand and control itsinformat~on requirements. The problems encountered, lessonslearned, and recommendations corning from this experience willalso be of value to systems planners and integrators.

This paper briefly discusses PSLjPSA, and the background" ofinformation system planning by the Army. The ~roblems inattempting to perform information s¥stem plann~ng by manual meansare addressed, as well as the benef~ts of an automated model.

What are the data requirements for an information model? Whatanalysis must be performed? What naming conventions should beused and why? What objects are needed? What relationships? Howdo they interact? How do these objects and relationships ma~

into PSLjPSA? Answers to these and other questions are prov~ded,as well as detailed syntax for the PSLjPSA implementation of theinformation model. The output requirements for informationsystem planning are also discussed, and some sam~le reports areprovided. Finally, lessons learned by the exper~ence are shared,along with recommendations and the current status of theinformation modeling efforts.

KEYWORDS: Information Modeling, Information System Planning,Enterprise Modeling, System Interfacing

DISCLAIMER: Please note that the opinions expressed in this paperare those of the author and do not represent a position taken bythe united States Army or any agency of the united statesGovernment. This paper has been cleared for open publication bythe united states Department of Defense on 11 Jan 1989. (885758)

EXPlANATION OF TERMS

The term Business Systems Planning (BSP) refers to an enterprisemodeling methodology developed by IBM, starting in the mid 1960s.This methodology defines the major functions, processes, classes ofinformation, and data entities which are used to define a business'sinformation systems processing. When BSP was adopted by the US Armyin the early 1980s,-the Army decided that Information SystemsPlanni.ng (ISP) was a more appropriate term. The main output I?roductfrom such a study is a Business System Plan (BSP) or Informat10nSystem Plan (ISP). To avoid further confusing the reader this paperuses "BSP/ISP" to refer to the methodology and "ISP" only to refer tothe plan.

APPUCABIUTI

This paper directl¥ pertains to a portion of a large militaryorganization with funct10ns such as direction, control, management,structure, acquisition, trainin9' distribution, deployment,sustainment, development, and d1sposition. The concepts andtechniques described are equally applicable to a business which mightadd or sUbstitute such functions as production, marketing, order (processing, etc. In fact, any large organization could use thesetools and methods to gain a better understandin9 and control of itsinformation requirements. ..Functions and obj ect1ves vary from oneorganization to another. This does not alter their need nor theirability to model the interrelationships of their functional andinformational requirements.

INTENT

The intent of this paper is not to explain the methodology butto demonstrate the application of it, with adaptations, in anon-going project using an automated tool, PSL/PSA, and the mapping ofthe BSP/ISP methodology into PSL/PSA. The reader will hopefullyobtain some insight into some of the problems encountered, lessonslearned, and benefits to be gained by such an effort.

PSL/PSA

Problem Statement Language/Problem Statement Analyzer (PSL/PSA)*was ori9inally developed in 1968 by the ISDOS research project at theUnivers1ty of Michigan. PSL/PSA was designed as an automated"entity-relationship-attribute" (ERA) model, and for several yearswas used primarily by students, who developed enhancements for itwhile doing work toward advanced degrees in systems engineering.While PSL/PSA was recognized for its power and versatility, it wascondemned for years because of unfriendly, complex and inconsistentcommand syntax and a generally accepted reputation for substantialcomputer resource consumption.

Largely as a result of these factors, PSL/PSA remained for yearsan academic curiosity, with interest outside the university communitymainly by organizations sponsoring the research.

* PSL/PSA is a registered trademark of the Regents of theUniversity of Michigan.

1

(

(

(

PSL/PSA began to come of age in the late 1970s and early1980s, as computers became more ~owerful and less expensive. Itbecame a commercial enterprise w1th the formation of ISDOS, Inc.in 1983, when many of the research sponsors became customers.ISDOS later changed its name to META systems and now licensesPSL/PSA worldwide. A partial rewrite of the PSL/PSA code (fromFORTRAN to "C"), along with the development of several newcompanion products by META Systems, has largely rectified theprevious problems of user "unfriendliness", sluggish performance,and large resource consumption. Carma McClure, an internationallyreco9nized authority on CASE, considers PSL/PSA to be on thelead1ng edge of second generation CASE tools (defined as having acomplete repository).

PSL/PSA is an exceptionally versatile relationship modelingtool. The language supports the use of numerous object types,relationships, commands, modifiers, and reports. It can be usedto model different applications with different methodologiesthroughout all phases of the s¥stem life-cycle. It has been usedfor defining system specificat10ns, structured analysis,structured design, project management, ship maintenance, dataelement dictionaries, systems interface modeling, informationarchitecture modeling, and others - including enterprise modelingor information modeling, which is the subject of this paper.

.BACKGROUl\'D

In 1981 the Inspector General of the united States Armydetermined that, in order to better evaluate the functioning andperformance of the Army, it was necessary to better define thefunctions the Army actually performs. Based on his direction, theTrefre¥ study (named for the Inspector General), completed in1982, 1dentified the eight major functions regularly done by theDepartment of the Army.

Further studies were conducted and, by applying the BSP/ISPmethodology, the original eight functions evolved into tenfunctional areas which became the basis for the HeadquartersDepartment of the Army (HQDA) Information Systems Plan (ISP)published in 1983. The HQDA ISP defines the functional processes,information classes, and entities which make up the HQDAInformation Model. It directs that all staff elements and Armyagencies, major commands and installations conduct similar studiesand produce similar ISPs and information models. It also callsfor the definition of a Data Architecture~ ApplicationsArchitecture, and Geographical/ Technical Architecture, based onthese information models.

In 1983 the US Army Deputy Chief'of Staff for Personnel(DCSPER) hired a contractor to perform such a study and produce anAutomation Architecture Master Plan for the DCSPER. Thecontractor conducted interviews with all top level personnel inthe agency, held numerous conferences with DCSPER staff personnelwith expertise in each of the functional areas, and used theBSP/ISP methodology to produce the Department of the Army DCSPERInformation System Plan. The DCSPER ISP defined the functionalprocesses, information classes, entities, and critical successfactors for the DCSPER. The study also identified organizationalproponency (advocacy) and involvement levels for functionalprocesses, and proponency for information classes, and developed alist of automated personnel systems which support the processespertinent to the DCSPER and developed descriptions for each. Theresults of the study were presented in several·formats. Some

2

products. There was,As might be expected,

automated tools were used to produce outputhowever, no linkage between the tools used.the end products were inconsistent.

In October 1984 the DCSPER Manning The Force AutomationArchitecture (MTFAA) Office designed a PSL/PSA database, loaded thebulk of the data from the DCSPER ISP into it and, by using PSL/PSA,generated the equivalent of each of the ISP output products thecontractor had produced. These products were consistent with eachother and were produced in far less time.

In late 1984 a second contractor was hired in order to validatethe findings of the first study and begin the definition of a TotalArmy Personnel Data Base. The PSL/PSA database was turned over tothe second contractor (who had some in-house expertise with PSL/PSA).The contractor was shown the PSA output products and told how eachwas produced. The contractor argued against using PSL/PSA and statedthat better looking products could be made by other means. The Army(MTFAA) insisted on the use of PSA outputs for the sake ofconsistency.

The contractor produced a first draft Information Systems MasterPlan, consisting mostly of a collection of PSA outputs. Theseoutputs included formatted summaries, descriptions, matrices, andlists. .

The draft was reviewed by the conference participants whorecommended and submitted changes. The contractor applied theupdates and produced a second draft which was then sent out forreview.

since there were only a few changes received on the second draftthe Army decided to apply the updates in-house. When Army personnelstarted to u~date the database they discovered that the contractorhad not appl~ed the earlier updates to the PSL/PSA database but hadinstead updated the PSA outputs. The Army took over control of thedatabase at this time. In January 1986 the MTFAA Office produced thefinal DCSPER Automation Architecture Master Plan, using DocGen (thePSA documentation generation package). The complete package of 500pages was generated by one command. All output products wereconsistent, thus demonstrating some advantages of using an automatedtool to support an ISP.

Having consistent output products is obviously essential forsuccessful information modeling. What comes out is, however, only as900d as what goes in. The fact that reports are consistent in no way~nfers that the information is accurate, but it does help to verifythe input.

INFORMATION MODELING WITH THE BSPIISP METHODOLOGYInformation modeling helps to identify an organization's

functional and informational requirements. These techniques providea vehicle for defining the interrelationships between the componentparts of the organization, their functional responsibilities, theinformation that they derive and utilize, and how they process thatinformation. Rather than discuss the specific functional andinformational requirements, this paper shows how this"meta-information" can be captured, maintained, and recycled back tothe supplier of the raw data by the use of modern CASE technology.

3

(

(

(

(

(

(

What is needed to constl'uct a meaningful and useful information model?

Data - 9Uite a lot of data, simplistic in nature, butcarefully rev~ewed and cleaned up and meticulousl¥ maintained.There are continual changes in functional respons~bility,

organizational structure, and system environment. As a result,the information model must be updated regularly in order to keepit current.

If the ISP is in a manual form it cannot be updated andrapidly becomes obsolete. Any chan~es would require that thestudy which produced the ISP be per~odically redone. This costs a~reat deal of time, money, and human resources and is totally~mpractical. It is essential that the information is maintainedin a fUlly automated form so that it can be easily updated asrequired, and consistent output products can be produced.

with the use of PSL/PSA, changes are easily entered andautomatically carried throughout the model. By entering a changeto a given aspect or relationship in one view of the model, thechange will show up in any other view in which the aspect orrelationship is represented. Because of this, changes can beapplied as they occur or become apparent, the model can be keptcurrent, and information extracted is always up-to-date.

Analysis - the analysis required is rather basic. Itconsists mainly of:

(a) reviewing and cleaning up the input which hasbeen received,

(b) identifying inconsistencies, and

(c) correcting them.

This is not to say, however, that the review and clean-up iseasy. On the contrary, obtainin~ and maintaining reliable data is~erhaps the most difficult task ~nvolved in any form of~nformation modeling. The difficulties are in:

(a) the volume of data,

(b) the number of sources for the data,

(c) identifying the correct sources.

with data coming from more than one source, quite ofteninconsistencies appear. However, when there is only one source,the ability to cross check against another source is not there,and invalid data may very likely be accepted.

The most basic example of mUltiple sources for the same datais in the definition of system-to-system interfaces. The completedescri~tion of a system-to-s¥stem interface will includecommun~cation protocols, med~a type and Characteristics, volume ofdata, frequency of data, and more.

The most simplistic need, however, is merely to identifywhich systems are, in fact, interfacing and what data flows fromone system to the other. At times this is extremely difficult todetermine, especially in the case of planned systems or systemsunder development or revision.

4

(

THE INFORMATION MODEL

The BSP/ISP methodology makes use of several interrelatedobjects in defining the information model. specifically, theseobjects and their data requirements are as follows:

Processes - Identified by the functional group numberand/or sequence number and process name and defined with one tothree paragraphs of narrative description, identification ofinformation classes created and used by the processes, criticalsuccess factors relating to the processes, systems supportingthe process, parent and/or subordinate processes andor9anizations with proponency and/or involvement with it.(F~gure 4 on page 10 shows a detailed PSL syntax definition fora DCSPER Process.)

Information Classes - Identified by the functional groupnumber and/or sequence number and information class name anddefined with one to three paragraphs of narrative description,identification of parent and/or subordinate information classes, (creating and using processes and organizations, and entitiesmaking up the information class. (Figure 5 on page 11 shows adetailed PSL syntax definition for a DCSPER Information Class.)

Organizations - Identified by the name of the organizationand showing the identification of parent or subordinateorganizations (if an¥), systems for which this organization hasproponency, informat~on classes used or created, criticalsuccess factors relating to the organization, and processes forwhich the organization has proponency or involvement. (Figure 6on page 12 shows a detailed PSL syntax definition for a DCSPERorgan~zation. )

systems - Identified by the system acron¥ID and defined withone to three paragraphs of narrative descript~on, identificationof parent or subordinate systems (if any), interfacing systems,major inputs into and outputs from the system, points ofcontact, and several items of specific environmental andcharacteristic data. (Figure 7 on page 13 shows a detailed PSLsyntax definition for a System.)

Points of Contact - Identified by the office symbol andlast name of the point of contact and showing the identificationof systems for which the point of contact has responsibility,type of responsibility, organization, complete mailin9 address,and phone numbers. (Figure 8 on page 14 shows a deta~led PSLsyntax definition for a Point Of Contact.)

Entities (Input/Output flows) - Identified by the name ofthe entity and showing the identification of parent and/orsubordinate entities (if any), associated information class(es),and system(s) having the entity as an input or output.

critical Success Factors - Identified by the rankin9sequence and name of the critical success factor and def~ned

with one or two sentences, identification of processes andorganizations which may have significant impact on the outcomeof the critical success factor.

5

(

Naming Conventions

strict naming conventions are necessary for the ISP objectsdefined in the model in order to properl¥ identify and sequenceProcesses, Information Classes, and crit~cal Success Factors.

Naming conventions are also essential to help separate andcategorize object names, and to distinguish between the severalISP object types modeled using the same PSL object type. ISPProcesses, Organizations, and Systems are all modeled using thePSL object "PROCESS". This is not a problem with version 6 ofPSL/PSA because of a sUbtypin~ capability. This model, however,was constructed using an earl~er version, and the namingconventions are an absolute necessity. Since this model coversboth the HQDA and DCSPER ISPs, some additional objects,relationships, and naming conventions are required.

lIQDA/DCSPER Information Model for PSL/PSA

As shown in Fi~ure 1 through 3, few of the object orrelationship names ~n the ISP model show any similarity to thosein th~ PSL model. Information modeling represents a somewhatunique application of PSL/PSA, which was originally developed asan ERA modeling tool. Some disregard for PSL/PSA terminology wasnecessary in order to successfully map the BSP/ISP methodologyinto PSL. However, "post editing" of the reports make thistransparent to the receiver who sees only the BSP/ISP terminology.

6

OBJECTS: Figure 1 shows the ISP objects, naming conventions,and corresponding PSL objects used to model them.

Objects used in the Naminy Convention ModeledISP Information Model (pref x- and/or -suffix) in PSL as:

Functional Group DA-99- -GROUP PROCESS

HQDA Process DAP-99- PROCESS

HQDA Information Class IC-99- SET

HQDA Entity DAE- ENTITY

DCSPER Process P99.99- PROCESS

DCSPER Information Class 099.99- SET

DCSPER Organization ORG- PROCESS

DCSPER Critical SuccessFactor CSF-99- MEMO

system SYS- (or) SYSREF- PROCESS

DCSPER Entity (System IO) IO- ENTITY

Point Of Contact office-symbol (last-name) PROCESSOR

The "9"s indicate a sequence number or position in astructural schema. "99" by itself represents a sequence numberwhile ".99" represents a sequence number within a highersequence structure.

FIGURE 1

7

(

(

RELATIONSHIPS: Figure 2 shows the relationships between theISP objects represented in the Information Model and co+respondingPSL relationships used to model them.

Relationships used in theISP Information Model

PSL RelationshipName

PSLAbre

Process/Organization Createsan Information Class DERIVES DRVS

(

An Information Class isUsed by a Process

A Major Input is Received by a System

System Creates a Major Output

Functional Group Decomposes intoHQDA Processes

HQDA Process Decomposes intoDCSPER Processes

EMPLOYED BY

EMPLOYED BY

DERIVES

SUBPARTS ARE

SUBPARTS ARE

EPLD

EPLD

DRVS

SUBP

SUBP

HQDA Information Class Decomposes intoDCSPER Information Classes

System Interfaces another System

Process is supported by a System

Organization is the proponent fora System

Process or organization supportsa critical Success Factor

SUBSETS ARE

TRIGGERS

UTILIZES

TERMINATES

SEE MEMO

SSTS

TRGS

UTLS

TRMS

SM

INCEPTION CAUSES INCC

SUBP

CLTN

SUBPARTS AREHQDA Entity Decomposes into

a DCSPER Entity

Information Class is Linked to an Entity COLLECTION OF

Process Identifies an Organizationas its Proponent

Process Identifies an Organizationwith Major Involvement

Process Identifies an Organizationwith Some Involvement

INTERRUPTS INTS

TERMINATION CAUSES TERC

FIGURE 2

8

BSP/ISP object and Relationship mapping into PSL Objects and Relationships

BSP/ISP terminology is at the upper left corner of the objects and in smallprint on the lines representing the relationships. PSL terminology is shown atthe lower right of the objects and in large print on the relationship lines.

Figure 3

0\

Des PER PRO C E S S

P_ °_-__process~name. _DEFINE PROCESS

DESCRIPTION;FULL NAMEspelLed out full name of the process*****************************************************************

-- brief narrative description of the process --

PART: DAP-_-_HQOA-process-name'----;. parent process

UTILIZES: SYS- system-acronymSYS----system-acronym'-----SYS- system-acronym'- ;

supportingsystem(s)

( EMPLOYS: D • - inf·ormation-class-name I0=.=-=information-class':name:=,D • - information-class-name ;--- -.-

informationclass(es) used

DERIVES: D_o_-_fnformation-cLass-neme__,.D_o_-_information-cLass-name__ ;

informationclass(cs) created

SEE MEMO: CSF- - CSF-nameCSF-=--CSF-name--------;

critical successtactor(s) which apply

INCEPTION-CAUSES:ORG- organization-name' _ORG- organization-name. _

proponentorganization(s)

INTERRUPTS: ORG- organization-narne _ORG----organi zat ion-nameORG-==orgsnization-name----

organiz8tion(~)

with majorinvolvement

TERMINATION-CAUSES:ORG- organization-nameORG----Organization-name·----ORG-==organization-name _

organization(s)wi th some

involvement

FIGURE 4

10

Des PER I N FOR MAT ION C LoA S S

DEFINE SET D. information~cl8ss-name---- ;

DESCRIPTION;FULL NAMEspelled out full name of the information class*******************************************************************

-- brief narrative descdption of the Information class --

SUBSET: IC- - HQDA- informat fon~class·n8me_; parent information class- -COLLECTION: 10- entity-name entities

(

10- entity-name connected10- entity-name to the10- entity-name Information10- ent f tv· name . class,

EMPLOYED: ORG-______organization-name I organization(s)ORG-________organization-nome &process(es)ORG-________organization-name which use theP • -_process-name information classP- -· -_process-nameP= -· -_process-name .

- ,

DERIVED: ORG-___organization-name organizatfon(s)ORG-_______organization-name &process(es)ORG-______organization-name which use theP · -_process-name information classp- -· -_process-nameP- -· -_process-name ;-

FIGURE 5

11

Des PER o R G A N I Z A T ION

ORG- ,organization-name, _DEFINE PROCESS

PART:

TERMINATES:

EMPLOYS:

DERIVES:

SEE MEMO:

ORG- organi%at ion-name _

SYS- system-acronymSYS----system-acronym'------SYS-~system-acronym, 1

D • - information-class-name I

D •=-:information-class-name==,D_"_-_information-class-name__1

D_"_-_;nformation-class-name__ ,D_"_-_information-class-name__1

CSF- - CSF-nameCSF-=-:csF-name--------1

parent organization

systemproponency

informationcless(es) used

informationcless(es) created

critical successfactor(s) which apply

ON-INCEPTION-OF:P • - process-name _p-"---process-name _p=.=-=process-name ;

- proponent

for theseprocesses

(

INTERRUPTED:

TERMINATION:

P • - process·name _P-"---process-namep-"--- process-narne-------P .=-:process-name 1

P • - process-name _p-"--- process-name _p-"--- process-name _

P=.=-:process-name i

FIGURE 6

12

majorinvolvement

in theseprocesses

someinvolvement

in theseprocesses

s Y S T E M

DEFINE PROCESS SYS- system-acronymL......---;

DESCRIPTION;FULL NAMEspelled out full name of the system*******************************************************************

-- brief narrative description of the system --

TRIGGERS:

EMPLOYS:

DERIVES:

UTILIZED BY:

TERMINATED:

ASSERT:

SYS-__system-acronym interfacingSYS-__system-acronym ·•IO- ent; tv-name majorIO:- entity-name ·•IO- entity-name majorIO- entity-name ·•P . process-name processesP- - - ·. -_process-name •- -ORG-__organization-name proponentORG-__organlzation-nsme ; organizationCs)

_office-syrrbol_- {_lastname_} PROPONENT POC,_office-syrrbol_-{_lastname_} ARA POC;

(

i-- ,

ATTRIBUTES ARE:SYS-STATPROG-LANGCOMMOIMP/IMMP-NOHOST-LOCHARDWAREMDEP-NOOSDBMS

'CURRENT/PLANNED','LANG:I

,"'I"'MM=p",nr--------....,--------, -- ,

'MDEP#·OS:'DBMS-:":---------------, ~ l

KEYWORDS ARE: 'PRE-MOBILIZATION','MOBILIZATION' ,, DEPLOYMENT' ,'EMPLOYMENT' ;

PERFORMED BY: _office-syrrbol_- {_lastname_} ,_office-syrrbol_- {_lastname_} ;

FIGURE 7

13

POI N T o f CON T ACT

_office-synbol_-{_lastname_} ;

DESCRIPTION;full mailing addressof thepot nt of contactin address format(to include zip code)

DEFINE PROCESSOR

.,ASSERTED BY:ASSERTED BY:ASSERTED BY:ASSERTED BY:

SYS- system-acronym'----__SYS- system-acronym,-__SYS- system-acronym,-__SYS- system-acronym,-__

TO BE POC FOR ARA;TO BE POC FOR ARA;TO BE POC FOR PROPONENT;TO BE POC FOR PROPONENT;

(

ATTRIBUTES ARE:AUTOV-PHONECOM-PHONEFAX-PHONEPOC-NAMEACTIVITY

'999-9999',, (999) 999-9999','(999) 999-9999',, ,---------------, :,

FIGURE 8

Output Pl'oducts

Because there is so much interrelated data collected in theISP Information Model, the possibilities for extractinginformation from it are only limited b¥ the imagination. Thereare, however, several basic re~orts wh~ch are standard to theBSP/ISP methodology, all of wh~ch can be produced by PSA.

For each HQDA Functional Group: A listing of all HQDAProcesses subordinate to it and all DCSPER Processessubordinate to each HQDA Process.

For each Process (HQDA and DCSPER): A summary showingthe process name as used in the model, the process name fullyspelled out, the description of the process, the informationclasses used by the process, and the information classescreated by the process. Additionally, for each DCSPER Processthe summary includes the organizational proponency andinvolvement levels.

For each DCSPER Process: A listing showing the systemswhich support it.

For each Information Class (HQDA and DCSPER): Thedescription of the process.

For each HQDA Information Class: A listing showing theDCSPER Information Classes subordinate to each.

14

Matrix reports showing the Process usage and creation ofInformation Classes, one for HQDA and another for DCSPER.

A matrix report showing the Proponency and involvementlevels which the DCSPER Organizations have with each Process.

A matrix report showing the DCSPER Processes and Systemsand indicating which System(s) support each Process.

In addition to the basic BSP/ISP outputs some additional reportsare beneficial.

For each System: A summary showing the System name as usedin the model, the System name fully spelled out, the descriptionof the System, the major inputs to the System and major outputsfrom the System, various characteristic data about the Systemand its environment, and a collection of information about theSystem's points of contact, to include: name, mailing address,phone numbers, and organization.

A consolidated Points Of Contact (POC) list: showing thename, office symbol, and phone numbers for each system POCo

A consolidated system characteristic list: showing thesystem acronym, operational status, operating location,hardware, operatin~ system, communication protocal(s) used,DBMS, and programm~ng language for each system.

A matrix showing the'systems and major inputs/outputsindicating which system(s) produce and which system(s) use eachof the inputs/outputs.

Additionally, several other reports can be generated tohelp purify the model and assist in architectural analysis.

CONCLUSIONLessons Leal'ned

1. The information model must be maintained in an automated formin order to keep pace with constant changes in functionalresponsibility, organizational structure, and system environment.

2. Other, off-line, techniques may produce more attractiveresults than can initially come from an automated tool. However, inthe long run the consistency and the ability to recreate theautomated tool output products totally outweigh the false beauty ofproducts derived by other means.

3. "Canned" macro generation of report packages can saveenormous amounts of time in the creation and tailoring of specificoutput products. Canned macro "post-editing" of PSA reports is alsoan easy and consistent way to isolate the end user of the ISPproducts from confusing terminology.

4. The "sub-typing" capability of PSL/PSA version 6.0, willallow objects to be named, referred to, and reported using theterminology desired, Le., "System" to be called a "SYSTEM" and a"Point Of Contact" to be called a "POINT OF CONTACT".

15

(

5. Another META Systems product, Report SpecificationInterface (RSI), allows reports to be generated showing theappropriate information model objects and relationships directly.

6. While processes and information classes may be of interestat higher levels of an organization, system interfacing and systemcharacteristics are much more important at the lower levels.

7. There is a general lack of interest shown in sUbmittingdata for what could be (and should be) a meaningful and usefulinformation model. There are two main reasons for this:

a. Data calls (requests for specific data fromsubordinate organizations) are all too often one-way streets.The information is generally useful only to the hi~her levelorganization which commissioned the study in the f~rst place.

b. The information, particularl¥ information ondeveloping systems and changing organ~zational responsibility,is quickly out of date and may be obsolete even before it ispUblished.

As a result, information models, for all their requiredeffort, tend to become bookcase fillers or door stops. One reasonwhy weak or inconsistent data may be received is the difficulty inidentifying the correct sources for reliable data. Roles may varyfrom system to system, process to process, and organization toorganization. Another is actually getting the correct informationfrom the source. Some of this is because of the individualpersonalities. variations in personal experience, level ofcooperation, and level of interest, as well as personnel turnover,are also important factors. Some is because of the degree offamiliarity which the source has with the SUbject matter involved.But most of the problems are encountered because of apathy on thepart of the suppliers of the data.

lIow can you ovm·come these difficulties?

Recommendations

1. Start early with an automated model and keep it updated.An information model is like housework - it's not hard when youkeep it up an a regular basis, but when you let it go, everythingbecomes a mess.

2. For organizations hiring a contractor to establish aninformation model: Insist on the contractor maintaining all of theISP data within an automated tool, and monitor the compliance ofthe contractor with this requirement.

3. For contractors performing BSPjISP studies and producingISPs: Actively use, and advertise the fact that you use, toolscapable of directly generating all ISP output products from alogically single data base.

4. Get information back to the people who submitted the datain the first place in a timely enough manner that it is useful.

5. Produce several smaller packages of information ratherthan one large package of several hundred pages. A few up-to-datereferences are far better than a single, large, obsolete one.

16

6. Put products out in soft format and/or have them availablevia E-mail or bulletin boards.

7. Require that requests for project funding identif¥ how theproject will fit into the overall master plan and, specif~cally,which processes will be supported.

Cm'l'mIt Status of the InfOl'nmtioll Model

Information from the DCSPER ISP database is now periodicallyextracted and formally sent to various responsible organizations forreview and update, As responses are received, they are consolidatedand applied to the database,

Various extractions from the Information Model are nowdistributed throughout the Army personnel community, and the PSL/PSAdatabase is becoming recognized as a valuable tool for analyzingsystem-to-system interfaces and tracking overall system architecture (development.

ACKNOWLEDGMIlNTS

It would not have been possible to write this paper without thetechnical, functional, and editorial assistance and moral support andencouragement of the following people: Fred Bock, Gene McGrath, JimHolt, John Hodges, C, Bresser, and Sonja McDaniel. My most sincerethanks.

(

17

( .(

( l I~

,

•

I

•

... .

•

•

•••

••

•

• •

-

•

I•

'---

•..•• •• ••--•

• •.­....• •

• •

•• •-•• ! •• - • •-- -I I •• • 1•- •

- ... -.k=~ .. -.....• 1--:: _-:., , •••• • ••-

••

•- ••--+; ...• • J.:- •• • • ••

•,.•

••

•

~I••

•~

••.:+_. •

..J• • •• • •• :.1:-- ••• •

•

•

••• •

'---

,:: !::: In·-1""--- --':·1 : I· ~

I --> >I, ", ", : ... ", I mz ~ m I" a" z~~ mz ~~ ~~o u ~

", I J 1-11 I C!III. II " £ "l!1" UIIIE"; I-Q:>1:Qlt I-l¢

, II 1:lXtClt U:J"Q(D¢ I !til" Z I I I I (lIUH1:1:lL ""¢:J

" II" 1II~~b1 1111111 II I111 ~" • 1L HI Z ZZ 1111 lIlIlIlilItlllltil mill 1: IUDlIIllIlI I

" E. U III ¢~ til ~ D 00 ltlL lIlIlIlI~lIlIU IIl1zzmt HltlXlXlX II" .« III lilt 1-111 IIl1lLlIlX til 1-1-1-1-11111111 CQQQCQC( Q(lIIlX1:1 tWbllIIlII1I III" ~ Willi IIQ.~O IIlL HU~HlL.1I liZ ZlililIlIlXlLlX IIIl1 II I I I I 11I1I1Lal~lLU IIlLllllLlXlI(Q", • lIHIIC("'U:"'QIX:>III:IIUI:I:H(~¢HIH»»lLllIlI(H~a:a:a:a:a:a:a:a:(UUII"'W"'III1HQQQQIX ... U:l

, ~ U-££'~~~J~("£mm~~(>Q£~~mOMM~i~OO~QQ£t~~···~·UUM.MOO~.U """""I~~, • (~(( ((~(.UUUUUQQQQ~~.m".xxx £££ZOOO ~~~~LLLCCCCClc~•••• mm••• ~" 1III111II111111I1111I111I11 1111111 1111111111111111111111111"" .11.11.11 ••••••••• 11.111 ••••••••• 111111.11 •••• 1111 •••• 1111 ••••••••••••••••••, »»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»

" .11 ••• 11 ••••••••••••••••••••• 1111.1111 •••• 11 ••••••••••••••••• 11.1111 ••••

'r'----:::~~::::~~r'--;:T'--::;:--,'-'----,',--rl --r'----r'--::;:--,'-:;;-l',--r'----r'--;;--r'-P.1_.1-~V-KANNXNO-QOALa/D8JP.1a.2-DEV-~-HGT-POL/OUXD

P.1 ...3-~V-PLANNXNG-POL/guXD~1a.4-DEV-ACCN-POL/OUXD

P~1a~~-DEV-MANPRXNT-POL/BUXDP.1 ...6-DEY-TNO/D~/BUXDP~1a.7-D~Y-DXaTR-POL/GUXDPG1 ...B-DEY-BU&T-PQL/QUXDPG1 a m9-DEY-TRANQ/SEP-POL/GUXDpe1_ 1GJ-DEY-PERS-P'LAN8P.1 .. 11-PREP-P~-CONT/JT-~NDP.1 .. 12-Dli.Y-THIL-ARt1V-MP'R-~P.1_ 1:s-ACCOt'F'--.v:"R-PROQ-POf'IP.2_.1-H&~~-.uDOET-EXEC

P.2.. G2-MGK-ACCEU8-8UDQET-EXECPG2...3-HeK-XNDXY-ACCTPG2_-.-KVAL-ACCN-EFFP.2 ~DT-auRVEva

P.2 -CDT-ANALVaX.P.3 .. _1-eDT-AUDXT.~~a.2-MGK-X~D-RE&OUftCE.

~g:~~DII:~~~~~~.,cu.~~ 1-~-HPft-POftTX~-TAA~.4 2-~TH-FDRCE-RKQ~.4••3-MOK~-RQHT-.V.P.4..~K-eXY-P08XTXON-HGTP~ .. .:I-Dto:Y-t1f""1It-prQRCK-.TftUC-X.....P.~ 1-eDT-RK.aARCHP.~ 2-DCV~.-t-ftOC-P'LAN

P.~ ..G3-Fa~~R-DuD.P.~ ...4-DEV-N c. r FtOCS/.uDCIIP.~ .._~D£Y ACCN-PROC/8TD.P~_.6-ACCKBa-PKft8

pg~_.7-t'lO_P&:RII

P.~ .. _B-MONXT~AT-ACQ-PftOGPG6.. _1-FCST-TOT-Aft-XNXT-TN-RQTP ••_.2-D~V-TOT-Aft-XNXT-TN-~P.6_.3-MO~-ARHV-%N%T-TRNG-PROG

pg7 .. G1-DKT-uNXT-~%-PER&-REPLP.7 .. ~2-DEY-PKR.-D%&T-PL/PROG.P.7...3-VAL-HXL-PKRa-RQN.P.7 .. ~4-Aa8XON-MX~-PERaP.7 ~HBE-eXVXL%~TP.7 -HOVE-PER.P.7 .. _7-HOE-XND-XLVL/RED.T/D8Tp.7...e-DKY/XM~-UNT-MAN-.VB-P.P.7..~-MOVE-C0HE.XVK-ELK~.p~e ...1_MONT-PERa-RDv-aTAT/UNT.P.B.. _2-MGE-PERS-STRP.B...3-HQ~-PERa-.Ec/aRTV-cLKAftP ••a.4-PROY-COMHUNXTV-gpTp.a...~-HGK-CAauALTVPt1J8 a ".-MGIi.-NAFpgU__7-HGE-COHP/.KNEFXT/Ii.NTXTLp.e__g-HQ~-CXYX~XAN-CLA8aXFXCNPGBa.9-HGE-CXY-CARKKR-PROdSP8g .. 1 __FcaT-PEFt.-P~-DEY-RKQP.g .. 11-"QK-PRO~-DEY-~P 12~-M%~-~ROHOT%DNa

P 13-"G.-"X~-PKft8-RKCLA••P ••a14-DKV/HGK~XL-RKTENTXONP ....1~HG.-P~-~-~....... 1..........-:-KJ1IP/~-ftaL.-~P1 1-HG.-T~-Pft088P1 2-DKt1O~

Th___ .y_~___ ------>=~gg~:':h:_~:~~"G

-s-

(

10

L"

"~-

~,

, ,,

"H

',

,a

~'

i OIl ~ .. =.. .. o =

/

~~~··········!~~~i~~~~~~~",~"",,000~55~1=~~=~"g···0oooooooo·~~~tii~i~~~

/eo

~~ii

~"""

"""O

"0"

00.;.;

••••••

•'00

•O·

~t'O

~~~~

··I"

=~C~

~"0

•l

/,~

100000

""t•

1~·OOt=

~~~~~~~~

"t···=,~~

"I"t"

o.~

~"!~

0I'

/••

.~

••••

•".

n,!

M_•

•I

III

II

III

II

~'

a~~~..

~NO

~O

D••

MI

I/

••~.

••••

•~'I

~·tO

~OOO~~~~~~~

!~~~~.

=.,•••~

=~.'

=/

U

"===

==I'

=.

••••

••••

••000

0•

=~0

"""

/.,

.,•

•..

....

....

.•

====

~,

",

/I

'It

II

II

II

II

II

II

II

I"II

•••

/n•

~a

r"W

~n5ro.~~

II

II

I.. •

/••

•I

Io~

~"~O

i~=~

•••

•/

•••

/•

o~g

~t

b~!"

I~11

>Il

lr!'

I/

~

••

"'~

IO.O

N~~

n/

•,

I'

=~'~

"•

•/

•I

~••

/•

"~

/,

"/

-"

/I

/~

/--

_.-

.__.

•/

..l

lA

O••

RJi

I

••

•l

•l

........

..........

.•

••

•-~

•.....

..~'

~l

•..

..0

8-0

••r

•I

••

II

•&

R£

J>..

....

....

..0

•:4

~'"•

•A

RT

"

I•

..

l..

I•

•I

I••

•I

...T

RR

IIA

UT

OR

:KP

..1..

lI

........

(I

,•

I...."

••I

••

••

C&

RQ

'Z',

&,T

II

••

•C

:J:V

P.R

IilI

XM

B

-o_

j•

O.M

X8

•I

0••

0•

I•

•D

AO••

a•

•D

....

....

...

D..

....

....

I•

••D

VZ

.(

••••

•I

••

80

A8

•••

••

•••

••

••

••••

•••

•••

•••

•--

I•

••

I_

RA

Il0

.:1...

••

I....

I•

JO

Z.

l•

•~,

x.'

I'a'

l'o

anc-

YO

L

1-'

••

•I

ll

xa

'l'8

'rO

M1

I:-R

:.Q

tJ:.

IJ'Z

'

•K..

...T

O..

-RaT

AX

MI

xa

....

TO..

-RM

8

••

••

•_

PR

II

...R

II

•,..

••

••

•1

«)•••

1U

iIMOII~PJliil

•....

:••

••

•I

••

OD

....

••

OD

xa

••

•••

.~~.

•••

••

••

•••

••

0_

I-t"

•••

It-I

)IJII

-AO

'T-.

)fL

l•i.

••

I..

It-D

a:a

:-&

.c'r

-or.

,..

a-D

IiU

I-8

UO

O.'

Z'

I•

I••

•Jt-Da:8-C%~OR.8

••

••

•••

R-D

IiI8

-J:D

M8

I••••

-D

II8

-K

A.D

Xa

.:

II••

••

I..

a-D

IiI8

-UO

IiM

AM

'I

I•

•...

-1)1

11

11

-...

....

I•

••••

-DIl

II-I

\O-.

ML

....•

••

Jt-

D".-

RO

-orr

.--

..JU

lAO

•

I•

•""

......

.I

••

ItO

OP

DIi

I

• :t-,

•I

•I

•_

0.......

I--

Ra:•

••.,.

(...

T.....

••

a._I

..........

I.

••

•lt

Oa

.MIi

iI

•••I

•••

RO

'l'C

-aA

aI

........

••

••

•R

RII

I•

.....

•II

OZ

Plr

lU8

••

•~-

••

••

•.~

..'-...-

::..•

...;.

aX

DP

.IU

iiI-

2-.

A.1

IZ

MII

(fo

;.t".

1-'

"-I

IIZ

DP

aR

JiI

-a

••

••

••

~~

~I

~•

.XD

P.R

8-S

-TX

.R-X

XX

-V1

••

••

••

••

aX

D••

R.S

-AJU

f'C

I•

•••

••

••

•••

••.X

DP

.R8

-Va:.

&R

•I

I•

I•

•.....

.•••

.-.a

T•

••

•••

•.'

Z'.....-.

I•

If·..

•I

'Z'.&

.6.M

RX

II/M

AO

D.

I••

•I

II

II

••

II

.~.. ..

. •I••

'Z'~D.

••

T~

•• ,

I

(

I

~~~•••

••••••

~!~'~"~==""""""'000=55~la~~~~HgR;R~~~~nnnnnl~~~~i~~i~~t

I"H

.~~ii~HHHHHHnl

SH

nn=g=g==.gRg.~~~

O~~~

~~~~t.~IH=~~~~

H•

fI

RlI'C!~~~~~H~

tRI

~nnt

'•,H

t.ll =

=HIH

tH~~

~=~

~I'

Ik,'

=~•"

"".

n,~

RI"I

II

III

IIII.!'

"=.

~n

~O••

~~

II

I'f'

'H=.

.~R~

'I~

==t~

t~~~

~~~~

~~~

~~~

~~a·

.··R~

ij8·b

IfU

.,n

=.I

~..~

~.~.~...

·===

==~

HHH

I~H'

n~

Il~,

'"1

11

11

II

II

IIIIII

H~

",

I

~QiU

W~"5rn.t~

II

II

=..f

I...

~I

In~

~Hr

1U5

~~

~I

HO

HI

••~

~g~

tb~

!HU

11~

~.•

I11

••H

'~

IORO

.~~

aI

,I

'=~

'~H

ff

I,.

I,

I.

If

fH

~I

I•

HI

HI

•I

I-

~I

•I

.-...

IA

C:r

.XP

Il~

.....I

.a.J

:RT

.M8

Atn

ul

I"'

"uv.

.1

lI0

:r,P

-QQ

PR

:lO

MO...

•co

.,n

:a-p

''&

•O

P..

...

OR

a-a

oor"

-TP

M.J

:ai

,o

w-r

OR

CO

WI)

OX

:lI

ID••

R.8

D••

O'l

'-A

SlI

I.T

II

'"''

•I

•I

D..

...,

IDOD-"~

..../~..

~P

...,

,,..

OR

J)x

....

-P

/...

11

0....

I%

Olt

I:l

DA

O.

I%

'1'0

.

•..-

J..

....

..

•.1

01

1'1

'%•

IL

J:M

'AP

8M

OII

'-"P

IM

OP

IIIT

.IIP

...,..

,I

MO

XO

O..

...-

.UJ

>G

.TI

.0

01

Um

o..

.-o

pn

.0

"---2

••

"-1

"1

'01

1.

PM

AD

IP

-p

oa

oI

P•••

IR

4P

ZD

."'T

"'-

•.....

.II

OR

TII

•..

..T

••....

II

II'I

I'..

.-r:

r._

.•

III

TA

.R.O

:lp

a8

TA

RO

J:P

II-R

II

•••

I•

II

'I'A

.&J)II

"V"1

"A.&

J)a

f'I

'...

.D..

TO

.I

"1".

...D

.

,

~

PSA Version A5.2R5M

System Descriptive Inrormation

~

MTFAA_MASTER PLAN

~

Feb 24, 1989 13:12:12~

Page 4

."-,'

+--------------------------------+I CURRENT/PLANNED !!--------------------------------!I 8ASELINE/OBJECTIVE I!--------------------------------!! USATRADOC INSTALLATIONS !!--------------------------------!

10-ACADEMiC-DATA --------------! SYS-AIMS !- 10-ACADEMiC-DATA10-CLASS-SCHED-DATA -----------! !- iO-CLAqS-SCHED-DATA10-PERSONNEL-DATA -------------! DEC VAX 11/750 !- 10-CLASS-UTILIZATION-DATA10-POI-DATA -------------------! OS: VMS !- 10-COURSE-SCHEDULES10-TESTING-DATA ---------------! DBMS: INGRES !IO-TRAINING-OATA --------------! LANG: BASIC+, "e" !

! DIAL-UP / DON (FUTURE) !+---------------------- --------------------+! FULL NAME !! AUTOMATED INSTRUCTIONAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM! ************************************************************************!! AiMS IS AN INTERACTIVE TRAINING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM TO BE UTILIZED BY! SCHOOLS AND TRAINING CENTERS iN THE ENROLLMENT, TESTING, GRADiNG,! SCHEDULING, AND GRADUATION OF STUDENTS. AIMS PROVIDES SUMMARY DATA TO! HQ TRADOC AND CLASS RESERVATIONS TO HQDA THROUGH ATRRS.!+---------------------- --------------------+

!--------------------------------!! MDEPH TSPU !

!--------------------------------!! IMMPH 57-85-400 !+--------------------------------+

Supports: PRE-MOBiLIZATiONMOBI L1ZATION

••"l' _ •• . ~ -.~ .

c"~

c-'

PSA Version A5.2R5HHTFAA_HASTER_PLAN

System Interaction

SYS-AIHSSYS-ATRRSSYSREF-FORDIHS-P/BSSYS-SIOPERS-3SYS-ROTC-HHSSYS-APDS-C

SYS-SIDPERS-2-ASIHSSYS-RECBASSSYS-STRAMS-ESYS-SIOPERS-3-TIER-III-V1

P03.02-HGE-INFO-RESOURCESP03.03-CREATE/HAINT-PERS-RCDSP06.01-FCST-TOT-AR-INIT-TN-RQTP06.02-DEV-TOT-AR-INIT-TN-PROGP06.03-HGE-ARMY-INIT-TRNG-PROG,

Feb 24, 1989 13:12:40

(Interfacing System)(Interfacing System)(Interfacing System)

"( Inte rfac Ing System)(Interfacing System)

(Interim Interface)(Interim Interface)(Interim Interface)(Interim Interface)

(Supported Process)(Supported Process)(Supported Process)(Supported Process)(Supported Process)

Page 5

~ ~" ~

::s­<.......

PSA Version A5.2R5M

System Point-Or-Contact Information

~

MTFAA_MASTER_PLAN

~

feb 24, 1989 13:13;37 Page 6

SYS-AIMS has ATIC-IMI!GOUGH! as the ARA point-or-contact.

2 SYS-AIMS has ATTG-M!BUTCHER! as the PROPONENT point-or-contact.

1 ATIC-IMI!GOUGHI

Mailing Address:

COMMANOERU.S. ARMY TRAINING AND DOCTRINE COMMANDATTN: ATTG-M (MR. GOUGH)FT MONROE, VA 23651-5000

AUTOV-PHONECOM-PHONEFAX-PHONEACTIVITYPOC-NAME

2 ATTG-M!BUTCHERI

Mailing Address:

, 680-2751', (804)727-2751', (804)727-3614''USATRADOC''MR. DON GOUGH'

COMMANDERU.S. ARMY TRAINING AND DOCTRINE COMMANDATTN; ATTTG-M (MAJ BUTCHER)FT MONROE, VA 23651-5000

POC-NAMEAUToV-PHoNECOM-PHONEFAX-PHONEACTIVITY

'MAJ BUTCHER I'

'680-2780', ( 804 )727-2780', (804)727-3614''USATRAoOC'

l-r><:;-;