SETTING A PACER FOR ACQUISITION
Instead, it’s, ‘Let’s see if we can get our interests out on the table and get rid of any hidden agendas. And when we sign off on our goal, I want everyone to support it.’ It sounds easy, but it’s hard to get right. And it requires teams of people willing to subvert their individual functional goals and make compromises.”
He noted that there’s little difference between the Pacer approach that CECOM rolled out 20 years ago and the IPTs in place today. Te process isn’t perfect, though. “One of the regrets is that we haven’t been able to take some of those streamlining effects and broaden them out to our larger, higher-dollar-value programs,” Gadeken noted.
EARLY SUCCESS
One of the first systems for which CECOM used its Pacer approach was TESAR, an advanced concept technology demonstration by Northrop Grumman Corp. This is a 1996 mock-up. (Photo courtesy of National Electronics Museum)
Also, Perry’s concept for IPTs assumed that teams were staffed with capable people across all functional areas. “In some places, we’re short,” Gadeken said. Limited billets and the difficulty of competing with private industry, as well as downsizing efforts and hiring freezes, have led to personnel shortages in systems engineering and systems safety, among other areas.
MAKING AN IPT EFFECTIVE Tese days, everyone and his brother is part of an IPT, for good reason: Tey work pretty well. “Tere isn’t a single program that doesn’t have one in place,” said Gadeken, who put the number of defense acquisition IPTs in the thousands. While initially envisioned for use with system acquisitions, the IPT concept also has proven effective for service contracts, which weren’t as prevalent when Perry issued his directive as they are today. Te Army’s recent decision to expand its rapid acquisition cells into the Army Rapid Capabilities Office is further evidence that IPTs are effective, especially in getting equipment to the field quickly and cheaply, Gadeken noted.
Effective IPTs share two characteristics, he said: cooperation and empowerment. Team members have to be able to make deci- sions to help the team move forward and then back-brief others who aren’t on the team. “What you don’t want are people who are just note takers for senior management.” Also detrimental, said Gadeken, “are team members interested in protecting their turf—that just leads to a lot of counterproductive squabbling.”
Implementation of IPTs prompted changes in the way program managers operate—less command and control and more coales- cence, said Gadeken. “Tere’s no more ‘follow me up that hill.’
172 Army AL&T Magazine January-March 2017
Continued success of the IPT approach hinges in part on devel- oping the next generation of decision-makers. Recruitment, training and development are necessary to ensure that “we have capable people with good functional expertise sitting in the chairs around the table,” Gadeken said.
Another factor in future success is leadership. “Te IPT leader can make or break the effectiveness of the IPT,” Gadeken said. Since most of the IPT members come from organizations other than the leader’s, he explained, “the effective IPT leader will usually have a collaborative style, rather than a directive one, [and] knows how to engage the different team members to bring out their best contributions. Effective IPT leaders are great team builders and great coaches.”
To read the Army RD&A article “Pacer Acquisitions: DOD Vision Becomes a Reality at CECOM,” go to
http://asc.army. mil/docs/pubs/alt/archives/1996/Jan-Feb_1996.PDF. For a historical tour of Army AL&T over the past 56 years, go to the Army AL&T archives at
http://asc.army.mil/web/magazine/ alt-magazine-archive/.
—MR. ROBERT E. COULTAS and MS. SUSAN L. FOLLETT
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176
