Through frequent and extensive high-level meetings, the EIPT received commitment from project and product managers for interim drops to the CTSF to alleviate schedule and integration risk.
The EIPT leader hosted weekly technical IPTs to mediate disputes and to keep the overall program moving forward until the software was delivered.
The Test IPT was delegated to the CTSF and the EIPT initially did not give it enough attention.
Additionally, the EIPT was working with a test timeline that was out of sync with Software Blocking, and a source of funds for FY04 test activities had not been identified.
It became evident that the EIPT had to separate the fielding and development process.
On the plus side, a positive lesson learned was the importance of defining expectations through a senior leader review, which for this EIPT was weekly briefs or updates to the PEO C3T.
In addition to standardizing and determining a good enough Battle Command capability based upon findings from Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF)/OIF, the trail boss, through the EIPT, facilitated a change from a bottom-up to a top-down architecture focusing on the seven Critical Commander's Needs, defining guidance on development of the current software and enhancing the operational and technical architecture, and serving as a conduit for the reception and dissemination of evolving and emerging Army direction for the road ahead.
4 good enough EIPT worked hard to provide an architecture that is integrated across all mission-area command and control systems.