EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE FORCE
the change, we will become irrelevant. Using the WLW to assess available manpower supports new strategic directions that will be critical. It affords leaders the ability to not only say “we are changing direction” but to assess if the organizational structure is acceptable. Tis is notable because the way ahead does not need perfect requirements—it needs data that supports flexibility to meet the needs put forth by the secretary of the Army and chief of staff of the Army. In other words, it needs an agile workforce.
CONCLUSION Going forward, incorporating predictive modeling software in the WLW should be used to determine probabilities of success when current manpower capabilities are compared with demands. Tis will ensure more rigor is placed on the assessment of the workforce structure and will continue to empower organizations at the point of need, maximizing transformation in contact.
Ultimately, project and product offices will reap several benefits from the WLW. First, it provides manpower measurements for accomplishing tasks locally, which means each echelon can use its own manpower data for maximum effect to meet the needs of the force.
Second, the WLW provides the ability to quantitatively measure requirements for KPIs or OKRs, empowering echelons to set their own KPIs and OKRs, much in the manner employed by the technology sector as explained in “Measure What Matters,” by John Doerr. Tis methodology allowed the U.S. technology sector to pivot at a rate equal to or faster than Moore’s Law, which is precisely the need expressed by the secretary of the Army and chief of staff of the Army to transform in contact. By comparing manpower requirements for KPIs or OKRs identified by leader- ship, goals are nested and driven to the level of meaningful action rather than pulled from the top. Leadership can then assess the level of effort required for their organization to achieve success.
Finally, our WLW and analytical methodology provides a common understanding of the skillsets that are nested within and across each organization, allowing for talent-sharing as needed to meet goals, targets and objectives that deliver critical and quality outcomes. Te WLW lists sources that define authorities given to execute each task, knowledge, skill and ability to align work- force needs while executing programs that the service has already deemed critical for transformation and modernization. Tis also occurs because the WLW is aligned to outputs for the acquisition life cycle and each adaptive acquisition pathway. Following this approach, regularly evaluating manpower needs and then hiring for agility (not strictly tied to position categories) will allow the
https://asc.ar my.mil 25
Army acquisition enterprise to introduce the agility and quality needed to maximize effective transformation.
Ultimately, the WLW and analytical process provides the abil- ity to transform in contact because with it, the Army acquisition enterprise will be able to regularly assess needs, conduct contin- uous process improvement and pivot manpower to anticipate current and future warfighter needs. Our manpower is the core element for presenting credible deterrence to adversaries and our processes serve in that role by creating organizational deterrence through the resilience and agility of the workforce.
For more information, contact Col. Matthew G. Clark at
matthew.g.clark18.mil@
army.mil or Lt. Col. Edwin Kolen at
edwin.l.kolen.mil@
army.mil.
COL. MATTHEW G. CLARK is the joint project manager for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Medical (JPM CBRN Medical) and is responsible for leading the medical portfolio for JPEO-CBRND. He holds a Ph.D. in behavioral and neural sciences from Rutgers University; a master’s degree in strategic studies from the Army War College; and a Doctorate of Humane Letters from Coe College.
LT. COL. EDWIN KOLEN is the joint product manager for Biological Defense Pharmaceuticals for JPM CBRN Medical. He was commissioned from Marion Military Institute. He holds an M.A. in management and leadership from Webster University; a B.A. in history from Norfolk State University; and he is a Certified Project Management Professional.
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
