Executive Agency
Rapid
Improvement Team
Executive Briefing
Report on Findings and Recommendations
May 18, 2001
Agenda
I.
Background and Charter Review
II.
Summary Findings
III. Proposed Model for Improving Executive
Agent “Return on Assignment”
IV. Rapid Implementation Plan
V.
Executive Support Required
1
Why This Executive Agent RIT?
 Sharing and leveraging resources across all
boundaries has become a strategic imperative for
DoD.
 Use of Executive Agents can reduce unnecessary
redundancy and achieve global consistency.
 Increasingly complex mission requirements coupled
with the absence of a clear, DoD-wide policy and
process deployment have exposed the need for
reinvention of the Executive Agent role.
 Promote Jointness across DoD Components
2
Executive Agent RIT Goal
Review the current Executive Agent assignment
process, roles, and responsibilities and develop
recommendations to significantly improve the reliability
and consistency of executive agent performance, in
order to:
 Increase end-user satisfaction
 Eliminate redundancy
 Reduce cost of commodities/services
 Increase cooperation and coordination across
boundaries
3
Executive Agent RIT Charter
Specific Deliverables
1. Updated definition of the Executive Agent role,
responsibilities and relationships.
2. Criteria for designating new Executive Agents and
validating existing ones.
3. A roadmap for executing EA responsibilities and
determining standards of performance for Executive
Agents over their life-cycle.
4. Recommendations for specific Executive Agent
assignments to be tested in upcoming FLOW
exercises.
4
Executive Agent RIT
Participation
Executive
Sponsors
LTG John M. McDuffie
MG Daniel G. Mongeon
Mr. Louis A. Kratz
Ms.Mary Margaret Evans
RIT
Champions
COL Bob Klass
CDR Mike McPeak
RIT
Participants
OSD, CINC and Service
Representatives, Defense
Agencies, and Joint Staff
5
Summary Findings
1. Across DoD there is considerable agreement on the
need to “reinvent” the Executive Agent role to better
serve the defense environment of today, and in the
future.
2. The starting point for improvement is the
establishment of a DoD policy that clearly
distinguishes the unique, unduplicable role of
Executive Agents as DoD’s primary resource for
fulfilling defined support missions.
6
Summary Findings (cont.)
3. To assure credibility and integrity, all Executive
Agent assignments must be made based on a
rigorous business case analysis.
4. Once designated, Executive Agents must perform
against a standard balanced scorecard, whose
goals are tailored to defined Executive Agent
mission responsibilities.
7
Summary Findings (cont.)
5. The increased complexity and rapid pace of
change in the military operational environment
calls for the installation of a disciplined, end-to-end
process to guide Executive Agent performance to
the highest level possible across their life-cycle.
6. To ensure the consistent application of the
end-to-end Executive Agent process, clear
oversight accountability and authority must be
assigned to an OSD level EA process owner.
8
Proposed Executive Agent
Definition
A DoD Component assigned by the Secretary of
Defense or Deputy Secretary of Defense to provide
defined levels of support for either operational or
administrative missions that involve two or more
organizations.
This assignment is non-transferable and remains in
effect until revoked.
The exact nature and scope of authority delegated must
be stated in the document designating the Executive
Agent.
9
Criteria for Executive Agent
Assignment
All Executive Agent assignments must be based on a
rigorous business case analysis that demonstrates the
potential for delivering better performance through
improved efficiency or effectiveness, or both.
EFFICIENCY is defined as:
EFFECTIVENESS is defined as:
Common tasks where
economies of scale in
providing goods/ services can
only be accomplished through
assignment of a single point of
responsibility and authority.
Common tasks where
capability to perform mission
critical requirements cannot be
duplicated without great
expense and/or risk.
EVERYONE can do it,
But only one can coordinate
and deliver it better than
everyone doing it alone.
EVERYONE needs it,
But one can do it for all at the
level of performance required.
10
Executive Agent Balanced
Scorecard
All Executive Agents will be accountable for achieving stated,
agreed upon goals tailored to their specific mission needs on seven
performance areas.
Goal
Goal
Metric
1.
End-user
satisfaction
End-user survey
rating actual
performance vs.
expectations
5.
2.
Dollar savings
from economies
of scale
Performance
against baseline
unit costs
6.
3.
Responsiveness
to changes in
end-user
mission required
End-user survey
rating actual
performance vs.
expectations
4.
Reduction in
Performance
support footprint against baseline
footprint
7.
Single point
of contact for
all
communication
Provision of
continuous,
sustainable and
global support
as required
Metric
End-user survey
rating actual
performance vs.
expectations
Robustness of
plans and
facilities as rated
by end-user
Ability to
Actual end-user
anticipate
mission
needs and match accomplishment
with optimal
scored
resource response vs targets.
11
Disciplined End-to-End Executive
Agent Process
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
Identify and
evaluate
EA opportunities
Perform
Business Case
Analysis
Make the Decision
to Assign or
Decline
Communicate the
Decision and
Educate on the
Impact
Reevaluate or seek other options
Step 5
Step 6
Step 7
Step 8
Resource the EA
and Prepare to
Execute
Execute the
EA
Assignment
Conduct Formal
Periodic EA
Performance
Evaluations
Make the Decision
to Reassign
or Divest
Restart the process as appropriate
A Roadmap for ensuring a high return on every
Executive Agent Assignment
12
Cross-functional Process
Involvements
Secretary of Defense
Makes final decisions
to assign and divest
Funding Authority
Ensures timely
budget allocation
EA Process Owner
Oversees end-to-end
process
Executive
Agent
Legal Authority
Support policy,
contract compliance
without hindering
performance
Provider(s)
Performs to levels
contracted, continuously
seek improvement
Subject Matter Expert
Brings forward EA
opportunities and
assists in business
case analysis
End User
Provides accurate
requirements, timely
feedback, cooperative
problem-solving
13
Model for Improving Executive
Agent Performance
Consensus
Definition and
Selection Criteria
Balanced
Scorecard
Clear, value-added
and unchallenged
Standard goal
categories and
metrics
Disciplined End-to-End
process
Defined roles
and rules of
engagement
Supporting Infrastructure
Resources,
systems
and expertise
14
Rapid Implementation Plan
(Establish Four Action Teams)
Team 1 - Develop required policy documents.
Team 2 - Validate proposed EA process, roles and
responsibilities in FLOW.
Team 3 - Develop a communications plan to secure
“buy in” from all key stakeholders.
Team 4 - Design supporting process tools (e.g.
templates for business case analysis, etc.),
and identify potential new EA assignments
with a projection of expected benefits.
15
Executive Action Requested
The Executive Sponsors:
1. Work together to identify the Executive Agency
process owner which will:
a) Guide the new EA policy and process to SECDEF
b) Provide oversight of the end-to-end executive agent
process
2. Approve the action plan.
3. Assure funding to launch and support four action
teams to execute the rapid implementation plan.
a) Action Items 1,3,4,- CMC funded
b) Action item 2 – FLOW/AI Pillar resourced
J4 takes the lead on communicating the case for
change to the CINCs and Services.
16
Proposed Logistics Designated EAs for FLOW






Barrier / Construction Material - Navy
Medical Supplies - DLA
Bulk Fuel - DLA
Rations to include Bottled Water - DLA
Ground Transportation in Theatre - Army
Water - Army
17