Background A constant challenge for Army acquisi- tion PMs is having sufficient personnel who are Level III certified in the acqui- sition career fields. It is critical that the PM’s staff have applied, not just scholas- tic, knowledge. One PEO’s hiring and development process brought people in at an entry-level pay grade (GS-3) and pro- moted them (typically through GS-11) as they demonstrated ability and gained practical experience


in varying roles.


Te PMs would assign new hires first to acquisition category (ACAT) III projects and later permit them to work on ACAT I programs as they developed experience and expertise. Te PM placed great value on logistics experience and knowledge because many issues in the acquisition process continued from cradle to grave. Developing people using this approach nurtured awareness of what “logistics” really entails.


Recommendation If you can’t find people with Level III cer- tification and applied knowledge, begin to develop them yourselves. Program offices should welcome the addition of less experienced members of the work- force and nurture their development through assignments on different aspects of Army acquisition programs. Allow these new team members to advance as they add to their expertise through work on a variety of


tasks throughout the


program management office. Starting a pipeline of homegrown talent will ulti- mately serve many programs within the Army.


LL_1078: Having the appropriate per- sonnel in the program management office (PMO), functional proponency office and contract support is key for program success.


IT TAKES ALL KINDS


As numerous Army acquisition lessons learned demonstrate, managing talent to build successful programs means finding and keeping the right people with the right skills, experience and awareness to overcome each program’s unique challenges. (Image by U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center/ArchOneZ/iStock)


Background Personnel challenges affecting manage- ment at multiple levels within an Army PMO and its functional proponent caused poor coordination across the program, making it hard to create a collaborative and productive work environment. Some leaders lacked appropriate skills, such as expertise in enterprise resource plan- ning (ERP) systems, ACAT I programs and information technology


systems,


while others had poor management skills. Management was seen as micromanaging, unable to organize the workforce needed to accomplish the tasks and unwilling to take risks. Te perception was that it did not plan well for the future of the pro- gram and that it sent representatives to


meetings without delegating the appro- priate authority to them.


When the program began, the person-


nel on board did not have experience with ERP programs and did not look to other ERP programs for guidance. Tere was no plan for acquiring the necessary personnel for the PMO, and only 14 of 33 spots in the Table of Distribution and Allowances were filled as DOD hir- ing and grade freezes and sequestration prevented the PM from hiring, moving or promoting personnel for several years. Program challenges during


that time


frame included development and test- ing of initial system increments, source selection for a follow-on increment and


ASC.ARMY.MIL


35


ACQUISITION


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