Reframing Acquisition Logistics Comprehensive Examination – Action Learning Project

1. Reframing Acquisition LogisticsComprehensive Examination – Action Learning Project James L. Kelly Department of the Army American University - Key 28 Cohort

2. Reframing Acquisition Logistics Agenda • Introduction • The Problem • Enter Chinook • Action–Learning • Recommendations

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. Reframing Acquisition Logistics

8. 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

9. DoDI 5000.2, May 2003 FRP Decision Nov 04 A B Concept Refinement Technology Development System Development & Demonstration Production & Deployment Operations & Support C Design Readiness Review FRP Decision Review Concept Decision LRIP/IOT&E ASARC Dec 97 DAB May 98 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 Reframing Acquisition Logistics

10. CH-47A 60-03449 Prototype #8 (Philadelphia, 1960) CH-47B 66-03449 (Vietnam, 1969) CH-47D-F 92-03449 2012 - Service Life to 2032 CH-47C 78-03449 (Haiti, 1988) CH-47D 92-03449 (Bosnia, 1995) CH-47D 92-03449 (Afghanistan, 2002) Reframing Acquisition Logistics

11. Action Chronology Introduce action learning, sponsor Select and train the action learning team Begin to address the success measures 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 Reframing Acquisition Logistics

12. 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 Reframing Acquisition Logistics

13. FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06-18 CY06- 18 CY96 CY97 CY98 CY99 CY00 CY01 CY02 CY03 CY04 CY05 Brief to AAE MS II Special ASARC Mar ‘02 Major Program Milestones LL CA Jan ‘04 FRP DR Nov ‘04 IPF CA May ‘01 LRIP1 CA Dec ‘02 FUE (14) May 07 LL CA Jan ‘03 LL CA Jan ‘02 IPP CA Jun ‘02 LRIP2 CA Dec ‘03 Lot 3 CA Dec 04 EMD Contract Award A/C 1 1st Flight A/C 1 Roll-Out CDR Program Definition ILS Review Program Definition and EMD Eng & Mfg Development (EMD) Remfg AC #1 Remfg AC #2 Draft RFP LRIP1 1st Del Oct‘04 Proposal RFP LRIP and Production Cont Dev LRIP 1 LL LL2 LRIP 2/ FRP to 2022 Boeing R&D/CRDA DT Vibr Bearcat 3 Testing Test Program Live Fire Testing OT&E OPTEC Continuous Evaluation R&M Data Collection Reframing Acquisition Logistics

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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, three-legged stool Reframing Acquisition Logistics

23. Thanks