Canadian Special Operations Forces Command’s Innovation and Project Approval Review 
Outcome-Based Program

Assistant Deputy Minister (Review Services)
Business Case Analysis
C Prog
Chief of Programme
Canadian Special Operations Forces Command
Canadian Joint Incident Response Unit
Canadian Special Operations Regiment
Canadian Special Operations Training Centre
Defence Capabilities Board
Department of National Defence
Expenditure Authority
Independent Review Panel for Defence Acquisition
Joint Task Force Two
Outcome-Based Program
Project Approval
Project Control Board
Project Complexity and Risk Assessment
Programme Management Board
Project Management Plan
SOF Capabilities and Recapitalization Project
Special Operations Aviation Squadron
Special Operations Forces
Senior Review Board
Figure 1
Figure 1. CANSOFCOM Organizational Chart. This figure illustrates the organizational units within CANSOFCOM.
  1. Joint Task Force Two
  2. Canadian Joint Incident Response Unit
  3. Special Operations Aviation Squadron
  4. Canadian Special Operations Training Centre
Figure 1 Details – CANSOFCOM Organizational Chart
Table 1 – Stakeholders
Figure 2
Figure 2. Approaches to Project Approval Process. This figure illustrates the standard and OBP project approval process for major equipment projects.

Figure 2 Details – Approaches to Project Approval Process
Figure 3
Figure 3. Project Approval Process Governance. This figure compares the governance for the standard Project Approval process with that of the CSOR Equipment Project. 
Figure 3 Details – Project Approval Process Governance
Table 2. Summary of Assessment for OBP. This table assesses the CSOR equipment project against the most recent policies, guidance and standards to provide a forward-looking assessment relevant to the OBP implementation and not to measure the project’s compliance.
The CSOR equipment project (2007) was assessed against the most recent policies (2015 Project Approval Directive), guidance and standards to provide a forward-looking assessment relevant to the OBP implementation and not to measure the project’s compliance.

A: Governance Structures and Mechanisms

  • Governance structures and mechanisms are in place
  • A change management process is in place
  • The rank/levels of SRB attendees is not always appropriate to support decision making

B: Risk Management

  • Risks are managed, through project risk register and discussions at SRB
  • Updated Departmental risk-management requirements (i.e., a full risk-management plan) have not been developed for the OBP

C: Performance Measurement

  • CSOR project performance (scope, schedule and cost) is measured and reported
  • Key performance indicators aligned to strategic objectives to measure OBP outcomes have not been developed

D: Lessons Learned

  • Lessons learned are captured at the end of the project
  • Informal process in place to identify, collect, analyse, consolidate and apply lessons learned
  • No centrally located repository for lessons learned

● Processes generally in place and operating effectively / ◐ Some deficiencies or areas for improvement /○ Processes to be developed or implemented

Table 2 Details – Summary of Assessment for OBP

ADM(RS) Recommendation

ADM(RS) Recommendation

ADM(RS) Recommendation

ADM(RS) Recommendation

Figure 4
Figure 4. Project Approval Process Key Stakeholders. This figure illustrates the key stakeholders and their accountabilities throughout the life-cycle of the project.

Figure 4 Details – Project Approval Process Key Stakeholders

Back to Table of Contents

Report a problem or mistake on this page
Please select all that apply:

Thank you for your help!

You will not receive a reply. For enquiries, contact us.

Date modified: