(fiscal year- and calendar-driven) and acquisition (milestone- and event-driven) reform with equal vigor. Acquisition reform initiatives have tended to focus on the Defense Acquisition Management System—for example, annual NDAA acquisition reform initiatives from Congress and multiple Better Buying Power initiatives from DOD—and have not succeeded in inte- grating these mutually supporting decision support templates.


One defense acquisition reform initiative that continually appears over the years is the elimination of non-value-added over- sight and bureaucracy. Te FY16 NDAA targets the reduction of layers of acquisition bureaucracy. In terms of lean thinking (a well-documented, successful commercial industry best practice), non-value-added oversight and bureaucracy equate to waste. All three iterations of the Better Buying Power (BBP) initiatives outline goals to streamline management, eliminate unnecessary oversight, reduce documentation and empower program man- agers (PMs).


However, the success of specific actions taken to effectively change statute, policy or regulations and successfully imple- ment these changes over time is debatable. Terefore, from a former PM’s perspective, I’ll make a specific recommendation that I believe would target the elimination of non-value-added oversight and bureaucracy.


MY BIG IDEA Te only way we are ever going to truly eliminate unnecessary bureaucracy is to change the mission of OSD and service-level


MILESTONE DECISION AUTHORITY


head shield wings Tail outline arrows PEO MS


DECISIONS, DECISIONS


DOD already has invested in the training, education and experience of PEOs. It could maximize this investment by empowering PEOs as the program milestone decision-makers. (SOURCE: U.S. Army Acquisition Support Center)


Would the CEO of a $2 billion company make a large financial commitment without the expert advice of at least one business adviser or a team of MBAs, as well as the board of directors? Not likely.


acquisition leaders to oversight, with decision-making being left to those with the expertise to make those decisions. Specifi- cally, I believe that the milestone decision authority (MDA) for acquisition programs should be at the program executive offi- cer (PEO) level. PEOs are trained, educated, certified members of the acquisition profession. Tey have decades of operational management experience and training in leading program offices, and they possess the necessary technical and business acumen, as well as the mandated acquisition certifications required of members of the acquisition profession.


By making PEOs the MDA of acquisition programs, OSD and service acquisition staffs can be optimized for oversight roles exclusively. Teir advice to senior leaders would be oversight and not decision-making—a lower threshold. Currently, OSD and service acquisition staffs have grown because they support the defense acquisition executive (DAE) or service component


ASC.ARMY.MIL


123


COMMENTARY


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  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192