Reframing Acquisition Logistics
Comprehensive Examination –
Action Learning Project
James L. Kelly
Department of the Army
American University - Key 28 Cohort
1
Reframing Acquisition Logistics
Agenda
• Introduction
• The Problem
• Enter Chinook
• Action–Learning
• Recommendations
2
Reframing 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
3
Reframing 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
4
Reframing 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
5
Reframing 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
6
Reframing Acquisition Logistics
7
Reframing Acquisition Logistics
Enter Chinook (cont.)
Key acquisition lifecycle program decisions
Key milestone activities already complete
Typically flawed program objectives
Required my direct action in 2004
Full-rate production decision
Logistics assessment
8
Reframing Acquisition Logistics
DoDI 5000.2, May 2003
A
Concept
Refinement
FRP Decision
Nov 04
B
Technology
Development
C
System Development
& Demonstration
Design
Readiness
Review
Concept
Decision
ASARC Dec 97
DAB May 98
Production &
Deployment
LRIP/IOT&E
Operations &
Support
FRP
Decision
Review
LRIP Approved
Dec 02
CH-47F Program
MNS
Mar 94
ORD JROC
Apr 98
ORD CH 3
JROC Feb 04
CH-47F Program Entered the Acquisition Lifecycle at MS B
9
Reframing Acquisition Logistics
CH-47A 60-03449
Prototype #8
(Philadelphia, 1960)
CH-47B 66-03449 (Vietnam, 1969)
CH-47C 78-03449 (Haiti, 1988)
CH-47D-F 92-03449 2012 - Service Life to 2032
CH-47D 92-03449 (Bosnia, 1995)
CH-47D 92-03449 (Afghanistan, 2002)
10
Reframing 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
11
Reframing 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
12
Reframing Acquisition Logistics
FY96
FY97
FY98
FY99
FY00
FY01
CY96
CY97
CY98
CY99
CY00 CY01
Major
Program
Milestones
Brief to AAE
FY03
FY04 FY05
CY03
CY04
CY05
LRIP1 CA
Dec ‘02
LL CA
Jan ‘04
LL CA IPP CA LL CA LRIP2 CA
Jan ‘02 Jun ‘02 Jan ‘03 Dec ‘03
EMD Contract
Award
Program
Definition
and EMD
Special
ASARC
Mar ‘02
IPF CA
May ‘01
MS II
FY02
CY02
CDR
Program Definition
A/C 1
1st Flight
FRP DR
Nov ‘04
FY06-18
CY0618
FUE (14)
May 07
Lot 3 CA
Dec 04
A/C 1
Roll-Out
ILS
Review
Eng & Mfg Development (EMD)
Remfg AC #1
Remfg AC #2
LRIP1 1st Del
Oct‘04
Draft RFP Proposal
RFP
LRIP
and
Production
Cont Dev
LRIP 1
LL
LL2 LRIP 2/ FRP to 2022
Boeing R&D/CRDA
Test
Program
DT
Bearcat 3 Testing
Live Fire Testing
Vibr
OT&E
OPTEC Continuous Evaluation
R&M Data Collection
13
Reframing 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
14
Reframing 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
15
Reframing 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
16
Reframing 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
17
Reframing 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
18
Reframing 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
19
Reframing 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 failure
In 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
20
Reframing 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
21
Reframing Acquisition Logistics
•
•
•
•
Acquisition Logistics
Recommendations
Establish milestone D
Conduct initial ILS
review at entry to
milestone B
Permanent Action
Learning process
Four frame analysis
Action Learning
Recommendations
• Project must include:
action, risk, urgency
• Don’t underestimate
training requirement
• Project components
are distinct, threelegged stool
22
Thanks
23