Figure 2. Integrated Product Team Readiness Level (IPTRL)
period of performance. Thus, execut - ing includes some criteria involving the prime contractor and major sup - pliers. The following discussion presents the evaluation criteria for the four as - sessment factors at each level of read - iness. As discussed previously, these factors—Charter/Team Norms, Ex - pertise, Resources, and Stakeholder Support—are each rated against the subelement criteria that follows to determine an overall rollup (Figures 2–3). Multiple shortfalls that are unac - ceptable and significant suggest the IPT is not yet ready to plan or execute. Unless noted otherwise, a green Over - all Assessment (bottom right, Figures 2–3) requires that all subelements be in place. Evaluation Criteria For Readiness Charter/Team Norms Charter. The program office and supporting IPTs must have a clear organizational structure that defines each division and how responsibili - ties are assigned, including up, down, and across the organization. The IPT or combination of multiple IPTs must have a charter that is clear on the vi - sion, objectives, deliverables, mem - bers, roles and responsibilities (both for the members and the team), and authority. The charter is documented and signed by the appropriate leader who charters the IPT. In complex pro - gram execution, a joint IPT charter with the contractor should be devel - oped and implemented. Team norms. This subfactor re - fers to a set of rules that govern how the IPT will operate. Studies like Google’s Project Aristotle high - light the importance of these norms. Members should discuss and agree to these rules to foster buy-in and commitment. These norms, some of which may be unwritten, do not guarantee success but are impor - tant for high-performing teams. The norms, sometimes referred to as an operating agreement, can be simple and straightforward.
IPT Readiness Level
IPTRL Summary Description
Full Readiness. Can plan and execute, has met all required factors Initial Readiness. Can plan and execute but has some noncritical shortfalls in key factors Marginal Execution. Marginal readiness to plan and execute, should address shortfalls in factors as a priority Limited Execution. Very limited readiness to plan and execute, must resolve critical shortfalls in near-term Marginal Planning. Some readiness to perform planning, not ready to execute Limited Planning. Marginal readiness to perform some limited planning, not ready to execute Resolving Issues. Beginning to resolve some key shortfalls, not ready to plan and execute Addressing Shortfalls. Has a sound plan to resolve key shortfalls, not ready to plan and execute Forming. Not meeting factors with key shortfalls, not ready to plan and execute
IPTRL 9
IPTRL 8
IPTRL 7
IPTRL 6
IPTRL 5
IPTRL 4
IPTRL 3
IPTRL 2
IPTRL 1
Full readiness to plan and execute
Marginally ready to plan and execute
Some limited readiness to plan, not ready to execute
Not ready to plan or execute
Source: Author
Figure 3. IPTRL Notional Assessment Matrix
Charter/ Team Norms Expertise Resources
Stakeholder Support
Overall
IPTRL 9 IPTRL 8 IPTRL 7 IPTRL 6 IPTRL 5 IPTRL 4 IPTRL 3 IPTRL 2 IPTRL 1
Factor Assessment Key Meets criteria Some noncritical shortfalls Marginal Significant shortfall Unacceptable shortfall
Overall Assessment
Full readiness to plan and execute Marginally ready to plan and execute Some limited readiness to plan, not ready to execute Not ready to plan or execute
Source: Author
MAY – JUNE 2026 | DEFENSE ACQUISITION MAGAZINE 7
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker