Upload
maverick-rushford
View
231
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition LogisticsComprehensive Examination –
Action Learning Project
James L. Kelly
Department of the Army
American University - Key 28 Cohort
2
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
Agenda• Introduction• The Problem• Enter Chinook• Action–Learning• Recommendations
3
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
Introduction
• Organization: Assistant Secretary of the Army - Acquisition, Logistics and Technology
• Mission: Develop, acquire, field and sustain
• Scope: Total lifecycle responsibilities
• Issue: Emphasis on early outcomes
• Result: Later outcomes suffer
4
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
Introduction (cont.)
• ASAALT is a relatively new organization
• Has not embraced its new responsibilities
• Army’s fielded capabilities programs:– Fail to meet availability requirements– Fail to meet reliability requirements– Experience support cost overruns
5
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
The Problem
• Desire to address both problems: organizational and capabilities programs
• Overwhelming task
• Focus on one program
• Improve other programs and the overall ASAALT organization through Action Learning
6
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
Enter Chinook
• Improved heavy lift helicopter capability
• New production and service life extension
• Upgrades 529 CH-47D to CH-47F/MH-47G– Restores high/hot flight performance– Enhances Army and Joint interoperability– Provides long-range SOF insertion/extraction
7
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
8
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
Enter Chinook (cont.)Key acquisition lifecycle program decisionsKey milestone activities already completeTypically flawed program objectivesRequired my direct action in 2004
Full-rate production decisionLogistics assessment
9
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
BAConcept
RefinementSystem Development
& DemonstrationProduction &Deployment
Operations &Support
C
FRP DecisionReview
LRIP/IOT&EDesign
ReadinessReview
TechnologyDevelopment
ConceptDecision
DoDI 5000.2, May 2003 FRP DecisionNov 04
ASARC Dec 97DAB May 98
LRIP ApprovedDec 02
CH-47F ProgramMNS
Mar 94ORD JROC
Apr 98ORD CH 3
JROC Feb 04
CH-47F Program Entered the Acquisition Lifecycle at MS B
10
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
CH-47C 78-03449 (Haiti, 1988) CH-47D 92-03449 (Bosnia, 1995) CH-47D 92-03449 (Afghanistan, 2002)
CH-47D-F 92-03449 2012 - Service Life to 2032
CH-47A 60-03449 Prototype #8
(Philadelphia, 1960)
CH-47B 66-03449 (Vietnam, 1969)
11
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
Action Chronology
1. Introduce action learning, sponsor
2. Select and train the action learning team
3. Begin to address the success measures
4. Integrate learning
Action Results Dec 03, near, mid,
long-term effort 30 day Jan-Feb 04,
verify near problem Late Feb 04 draft ILS
review, FRP decision milestone schedule
Mar 04 ASARC
12
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
Aircraft System
ILS Review• Performance:
– Reliability
– Availability
– Maintainability
• Suitability• Safety
Logistics System
ILS Review• Supportability strategy• Business case analysis• Lifecycle cost analysis• Support agreements• ILS management
control plan
13
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
LRIP 1
CY06-18
FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06-18
MajorProgram
Milestones
Brief to AAE MS II
TestProgram
LL CAJan ‘02
CY96 CY97 CY98 CY99 CY00 CY01 CY02 CY03 CY04 CY05IPF CAMay ‘01
LRIP1 CADec ‘02
Cont Dev
Draft RFP Proposal
LL
LRIP 2/ FRP to 2022
Lot 3 CADec 04
LL2
OPTEC Continuous Evaluation
Live Fire Testing
Boeing R&D/CRDA
Bearcat 3 Testing
FRP DRFRP DRNov ‘04Nov ‘04
FUE (14)May 07
LRIP1 1st Del Oct‘04
ProgramDefinitionand EMD
LRIP and
Production
EMD Contract Award
CDRA/C 1
1st FlightA/C 1
Roll-Out Program Definition
Eng & Mfg Development (EMD)
Remfg AC #1
Remfg AC #2
RFP
OT&E
LRIP2 CADec ‘03
DT
IPP CAJun ‘02
Special ASARCMar ‘02
R&M Data Collection
Vibr
LL CAJan ‘03
LL CAJan ‘04
ILSReview
14
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
#1 What am I learning about myself, my leadership potential, and the structure, people, politics, and culture of the organization? How is this learning evolving over the course of the project?– Solid leader, had to lead outside of the normal structure
– Brokering, coaching, facilitating and mentoring skills
– Unforeseen challenges: facilitating SES, coaching
– Structure, people, politics and culture inflexible
– Significant repositioning to remain relevant
15
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
#2 How is my mindset influencing the data that I see, the decisions I make, and the results I achieve?– 20-year Army Aviator– See acquisition results– Not used to questioning– My mindset challenges
the status quo
16
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
#3 What am I blind to and how might I expand my vision of what I can see about myself, and others in this organization?– Army Acquisition Corps
mindset, Level-III cert.– Army requirements,
permanent action learning process
17
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
#4 What courses at AU am I drawing on in the process of conducting this project? Specifically, how am I applying these courses to the project?– PUAD 622 Leadership: Leadership - Applied all four of
Professor Zauderer’s unique leadership roles: broker, coach, facilitator, leader; applied self-leadership concepts throughout
– PUAD 624 Budgeting: Stewardship - Applied Professor Rigby’s US Federal and DoD budget concepts from planning through budgeting, execution & final audit of achieved goals
18
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
#4 (cont.)– PUAD 625 Research & Program Evaluation: Accountability
- Applied Professor Kingsbury and Norland’s supremely useful Logic Model which became the foundation of the integrated logistics review and acquisition reframing
– PUAD 627 Politics & Policy Making: Awareness - Applied Professor Zuck’s concept of the political playing field and thus defined the opposing and supporting sides; brought logisticians into the game via the ASARC-IPT arena
19
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
#4 (cont.)– PUAD 634 Acquisition Management: Methodology -
Applied Professor Mohr’s contracting principles to late phase of the acquisition lifecycle; insisted on competitive selection, performance-based support contracts; applied the new GAO procurement evaluation framework to ASAALT structure
– PUAD 654 Organizational Diagnosis & Change: Learning - Applied all of Professor Kramer’s organizational framing and Action Learning concepts; applied structural frame to the ASAALT organization; permanent Action Learning
20
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
#5 How did Action Learning perform in a real organization? Better than at AU; Why...?– Action Learning team very familiar with the problem– All had a stake in the CH-47F program outcomes– All shared in the risk of inaction or failureIn addition…– DoD uses integrated product teams extensively– One can lead from coach, presenter or participant roles– Pace, results and scope of defense acquisition work has
many searching for and receptive to new ways of thinking
21
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
#6 What didn’t I expect to learn?– DASA-ILS staff divisions
are not well integrated
– Action Learning and ILS review are universally applicable in DoD
– Action Learning project components form an integrated product
22
Reframing Acquisition LogisticsReframing Acquisition Logistics
Acquisition LogisticsRecommendations
• Establish milestone D• Conduct initial ILS
review at entry to milestone B
• Permanent Action Learning process
• Four frame analysis
Action LearningRecommendations
• Project must include: action, risk, urgency
• Don’t underestimate training requirement
• Project components are distinct, three-legged stool
23
Thanks