print this page

RMSS: About Standardisation
Some general standardisation principles

Standards and Standardisation
There is a distinct difference between "standardisation" and the term "standards". "Standardisation" has a much wider meaning; it includes having the necessary standardisation management infrastructure, having the necessary coordinating processes, and having the required policy and procedures as well as the necessary resources to fund various aspects of the standardisation process and mechanisms. As part of the standardisation management process it also includes disciplined procedures with respect to the intelligent selection, adoption, development, use and control of “standards”, as required.

In essence atandardisation is a process, whereas standards represent some of the products that are the result of the standardisation process.

Variety control

“Standards promote economy through variety control. The type of standard will determine where the reduction lies, for example in a range of product sizes, a number of different types of equipment or a variety of test methods.”

A strong justification in favour of the cause of standardisation is given by the following two quotes:
“Without standards or other constraining factors, varieties tend to proliferate continually”, and
“The most common form of standardisation action is variety reduction.”

Standardisation, Interoperability, Interchangeability, Commonality and Compatibility

These concepts and their interrelationship can perhaps best be described by the NATO Standardisation policy, which states the following:

“In order to strengthen the Alliance Defence capabilities, it is Alliance policy that Nations and NATO Authorities will enhance interoperability inter alia through standardisation. NATO Nations will develop, agree and implement standardisation agreements to achieve and maintain compatibility, interchangeability or commonality of concepts, doctrine, procedures and design. These agreements, once ratified, will be promulgated in appropriate STANAGs (Standardisation Agreements) and Allied Publications (APs). Nations, having accepted the agreements, will implement them in the most expeditious manner in response to operational needs.”

“NATO Standardisation has recently been redefined as “The development and implementation of concepts, doctrines, procedures and designs to achieve and maintain the required levels of compatibility, interchangeability or commonality in the operational, procedural, materiel, technical and administrative fields to attain interoperability”. Standardisation is thus not a goal in itself, it is a tool to achieve the required interoperability among participating forces.”

“In this respect, interoperability, which used to be a level of standardisation in NATO, has been redefined to give it a broader meaning and is now defined as “The ability of Alliance Forces, and when appropriate, forces of partner and other nations, to train, exercise and operate effectively together, in the execution of assigned missions and tasks”.”

Standardisation, Acquisition and Procurement (Ref: UK DEF Stan)

“Standardisation is fundamental to the effective and efficient acquisition, support and use of Defence equipment, and standardisation has specific benefits in promoting operational effectiveness through improved interoperability in addition to reducing risks to Time, Cost and Performance requirements. The application of Smart Standardisation principles is essential to achieving the benefits of Smart Acquisition”.

“Smart Acquisition depends on taking Smart Standardisation decisions, at all stages of the Acquisition cycle.”

“The minimum number of standards should be selected to meet defined user and system requirements.”

“In seeking to use standardisation more intelligently and to avoid 'gold plated' military equipment solutions there must be a greater emphasis on, and willingness to use, the same standards as industry (where appropriate). To facilitate an increase of innovative ideas and new technology in projects, requirements shall be specified in performance terms rather than in a prescriptive manner. This leaves the solution much more within the control of the contractor. The minimum number of standards should be invoked prior to consultation with industry. Industry should be encouraged to propose standards it feels are best suited to meet the performance requirements.”

“The standardisation process is not a one off, up front activity. It is applicable through the life of a project, so it is essential that the correct balance between standardisation and diversification is made in order to promote efficiency through common platforms, systems, sub systems and components (variety control). This extends to procuring common enabling capability such as test equipment and repair equipment. IPTs need to consult with the appropriate platform, equipment and commodity IPTs before procuring platform specific solutions and ensure that all engineering logistic commercial implications have been fully considered. This is not restricted to in-service commonality but also encompasses future planned items.” It is also important to note that great effort should be made during the earlier stages of the Acquisition Phase with respect to standardisation decisions and actions. It is during this stage that a great deal of influence can still be exercised with regard to optimum standardisation (incl interoperability, interchangeability, sharing of products with other Programmes, etc).

Standardisation within Acquisition and Procurement is mainly conducted by way of Parts Management as well as the intelligent use and referencing of preferred standards and specifications contained in centralized standards data-bases (e.g. in the USA DOD Military system, the ASSIST database is available).

Other key principles about Standards, and their role in support of the core Military Business processes

A. Standards should be needed and wanted
The production of standards relies upon the willingness of all parties concerned to reach voluntary agreement among themselves for one or more stated purposes. Standards should be produced only when its requirements cannot be met by suitable national, regional and international civil and military standards. If consensus is reached that a certain standardisation requirement is to be met by accepting existing standards (external, internal, national, international, etc), then, instead of developing a new standard, such standard/s should be listed or referenced as such in a central standardisation registry. This will indicate clearly what preferences are to be given priority.

B. Standards should be used
The application of standards relies on the voluntary commitment to prepare them being extended to their use. The publication of a standard is of little value if it is not used and/or applied. The intended application of a standard should be clearly understood at the start and should be borne in mind throughout its preparation.

C. Standards should be designed for ease of reference and be written in a concise, clear and unambiguous way
Different types of standards are written in different ways and for particular purposes.
Verification of compliance with specified requirements should always be possible within a realistic time and at a reasonable cost.
Standards should also be developed in such a way that tailoring is possible, in cases where specific users might want to incorporate slight changes.

D. Standards requirements should be agreed upon at the widest level
Without sufficient coordination it is possible that duplication of standardisation efforts could occur at different levels. The simultaneous preparation of similar standards on identical aspects/subjects at different levels should be avoided as far as possible. For economy of total effort a standard should be prepared at the broadest level consistent with meeting the needs of all the interested parties.

E. Standardisation: a matter of consensus amongst stakeholders
The development of specifications and standards is a consensus process that involves (and should involve) many individuals and role-players, internally and externally.

This consensus process helps to ensure that when there are aspects and interests that involve (or potentially could involve) more than one stakeholder, such interests can be addressed with the view to finding the optimum, “standardised” solution (a-one-size-fits-all-approach). Of course it is not always that easy and straight-forward, as many a standardisation representative will confess, but it at least supplies the right basis from where to start addressing potential standardisation opportunities. It also supplies the right foundation to share resources in order to find those best solutions that will eventually benefit all those who painstakingly partake in the standardisation process.

Without such a consensus-oriented approach, there will be very little “standardisation”, because standardised solutions do not just automatically “happen” in a haphazard way, as most of us know.

F. Standards should be impartial
Standards should not give significant advantage to the products or services of any supplier, group of people, or the industry of any particular country. Military Standards should therefore rather specify the performance requirements from products and processes (or services), instead of describing the detail, e.g. the specific form or materials involved. (This aspect relates to the Acquisition Reform process initiated by the USA Military Defence Force.)

G. Standards should be planned
Once the need for a standard has been established, the planning of its preparation and content is of prime importance. From the outset, to ensure that its contents are technically feasible, commercially acceptable and presented in an unambiguous form, the objectives of the standard shall be carefully considered and defined.
A standard states what has been established or is about to be established. The process of developing standards is essentially one of selection. A standard may contain only that which the interested parties are prepared to agree on at the time it is written.

H. Standards should be reviewed
Standards should be reviewed at regular intervals and appropriate action should be taken to ensure that they are up to date. This is an aspect that is grossly neglected in many standardisation areas – and is certainly the case with respect to RSA-Military Standards!

I. Standards should be voluntary as far as possible
Generally, the use of standards should be based on voluntary buy-in from users. This is only possible when the development and preparation (or selection) processes have been well coordinated, and when consensus has been obtained from a wide stakeholder base. However, if the above-mentioned principles are followed, with a willingness of stakeholders and users to support the process and participate in standardisation projects to reach agreement on standardisation-related problems, it is usually found that the status of such a standard is such that it spontaneously becomes acceptable, in other words the more likely it is that such a standard will be voluntary acceptable to users. Unfortunately, the opposite is also true.

J. The standardisation process should be integrated with core business activities
For standards and standardisation to be effective, there should be sufficient integration with core activities. During the course of the business, problems may be experienced. If these problems relate to standardisation (e.g. duplication, non-interoperability, too much/unnecessary varieties of potentially similar things, etc.), an effective and integrative system should be available to ensure that these issues can be dealt with in a coordinated way – within the organisational standardisation structures and involving all other parties that might have an interest therein. It is then expected that the solution (whatever the standardisation proposal or outcome might be) would enable core business to be more efficient. If that does not happen, or if it is not possible to deal with a particular (standardisation-related) problem efficiently, the standardisation system will fall into discredit.

Likewise, if a standardisation decision has been made (in a well coordinated way and with sufficient participation and buy-in from the user community, etc.), there should be a culture (within the confines of the specific business) to spontaneously and voluntarily give that particular standardisation decision (which may be a new standard, an item listed on a preferred parts list, or reference to an internationally preferred standard, etc) the expected preferred status.