Executive Agency Rapid Improvement Team Executive Briefing

1
Executive Agency Rapid Improvement
TeamExecutive Briefing

• Report on Findings and RecommendationsMay 18,
  2001

2
Agenda

• Background and Charter Review
• Summary Findings
• Proposed Model for Improving Executive Agent
  Return on Assignment
• Rapid Implementation Plan
• Executive Support Required

3
Why This Executive Agent RIT?

• Sharing and leveraging resources across all
  boundaries has become a strategic imperative for
  DoD.
• Use of Executive Agents can reduce unnecessary
  redundancy and achieve global consistency.
• Increasingly complex mission requirements coupled
  with the absence of a clear, DoD-wide policy and
  process deployment have exposed the need for
  reinvention of the Executive Agent role.
• Promote Jointness across DoD Components

4
Executive Agent RIT Goal

• Review the current Executive Agent assignment
  process, roles, and responsibilities and develop
  recommendations to significantly improve the
  reliability and consistency of executive agent
  performance, in order to
• Increase end-user satisfaction
• Eliminate redundancy
• Reduce cost of commodities/services
• Increase cooperation and coordination across
  boundaries

5
Executive Agent RIT CharterSpecific Deliverables

• Updated definition of the Executive Agent role,
  responsibilities and relationships.
• Criteria for designating new Executive Agents and
  validating existing ones.
• A roadmap for executing EA responsibilities and
  determining standards of performance for
  Executive Agents over their life-cycle.
• Recommendations for specific Executive Agent
  assignments to be tested in upcoming FLOW
  exercises.

6
Executive Agent RIT Participation

• Executive Sponsors

• LTG John M. McDuffie
• MG Daniel G. Mongeon
• Mr. Louis A. Kratz
• Ms.Mary Margaret Evans

RITChampions
COL Bob Klass CDR Mike McPeak
RITParticipants
OSD, CINC and Service Representatives,
Defense Agencies, and Joint Staff
7
Summary Findings

• Across DoD there is considerable agreement on the
  need to reinvent the Executive Agent role to
  better serve the defense environment of today,
  and in the future.
• The starting point for improvement is the
  establishment of a DoD policy that clearly
  distinguishes the unique, unduplicable role of
  Executive Agents as DoDs primary resource for
  fulfilling defined support missions.

8
Summary Findings (cont.)

• To assure credibility and integrity, all
  Executive Agent assignments must be made based on
  a rigorous business case analysis.
• Once designated, Executive Agents must perform
  against a standard balanced scorecard, whose
  goals are tailored to defined Executive Agent
  mission responsibilities.

9
Summary Findings (cont.)

• The increased complexity and rapid pace of change
  in the military operational environment calls for
  the installation of a disciplined, end-to-end
  process to guide Executive Agent performance to
  the highest level possible across their
  life-cycle.
• To ensure the consistent application of
  theend-to-end Executive Agent process, clear
  oversight accountability and authority must be
  assigned to an OSD level EA process owner.

10
Proposed Executive Agent Definition

• A DoD Component assigned by the Secretary of
  Defense or Deputy Secretary of Defense to provide
  defined levels of support for either operational
  or administrative missions that involve two or
  more organizations.
• This assignment is non-transferable and remains
  in effect until revoked.
• The exact nature and scope of authority delegated
  must be stated in the document designating the
  Executive Agent.

11
Criteria for Executive Agent Assignment

• All Executive Agent assignments must be based on
  a rigorous business case analysis that
  demonstrates the potential for delivering better
  performance through improved efficiency or
  effectiveness, or both.

EFFICIENCY is defined as Common tasks where
economies of scale in providing goods/ services
can only be accomplished through assignment of a
single point of responsibility and
authority. EVERYONE can do it,But only one can
coordinate and deliver it better than everyone
doing it alone.
EFFECTIVENESS is defined as Common tasks where
capability to perform mission critical
requirements cannot be duplicated without great
expense and/or risk. EVERYONE needs it,But one
can do it for all at the level of performance
required.
12
Executive Agent Balanced Scorecard
All Executive Agents will be accountable for
achieving stated, agreed upon goals tailored to
their specific mission needs on seven performance
areas.
Goal Metric
Goal Metric
End-user surveyrating actualperformance
vs.expectations
5. Single pointof contact forallcommunicatio
n

• End-usersatisfaction

End-user surveyrating actualperformance
vs.expectations
6. Provision ofcontinuous,sustainable
andglobal supportas required
Robustness ofplans and facilities as rated by
end-user

• Dollar savingsfrom economiesof scale

Performanceagainst baselineunit costs

• Responsivenessto changes inend-usermission
  required

End-user surveyrating actualperformance
vs.expectations
7. Ability toanticipateneeds and matchwith
optimalresource response
Actual end-usermissionaccomplishment scored vs
targets.

• Reduction insupport footprint

Performanceagainst baselinefootprint
13
Disciplined End-to-End Executive Agent Process
Step 1
Step 3
Step 4
Step 2
Identify andevaluateEA opportunities
Make the Decisionto Assign orDecline
Communicate theDecision andEducate on
the Impact
PerformBusiness Case Analysis
Reevaluate or seek other options
Step 5
Step 7
Step 8
Step 6
Resource the EAand Prepare toExecute
Conduct FormalPeriodic EAPerformanceEvaluations
Make the Decisionto Reassignor Divest
Execute theEAAssignment
Restart the process as appropriate
A Roadmap for ensuring a high return on
everyExecutive Agent Assignment
14
Cross-functional Process Involvements
Subject Matter Expert
Brings forward EAopportunities andassists in
businesscase analysis
15
Model for Improving Executive Agent Performance
Clear, value-addedand unchallenged
ConsensusDefinition andSelection Criteria
Standard goalcategories andmetrics
BalancedScorecard
Defined rolesand rules ofengagement
Disciplined End-to-Endprocess
Resources,systemsand expertise
Supporting Infrastructure
16
Rapid Implementation Plan(Establish Four Action
Teams)
Team 1 - Develop required policy documents. Team
2 - Validate proposed EA process, roles and
responsibilities in FLOW. Team 3 - Develop
a communications plan to secure buy in
from all key stakeholders. Team 4 - Design
supporting process tools (e.g.
templates for business case analysis, etc.),
and identify potential new EA assignments
with a projection of expected benefits.
17
Executive Action Requested

• The Executive Sponsors
• Work together to identify the Executive Agency
  process owner which will
• Guide the new EA policy and process to SECDEF
• Provide oversight of the end-to-end executive
  agent process
• Approve the action plan.
• Assure funding to launch and support four action
  teams to execute the rapid implementation plan.
• Action Items 1,3,4,- CMC funded
• Action item 2 FLOW/AI Pillar resourced
• J4 takes the lead on communicating the case for
  change to the CINCs and Services.

18
Proposed Logistics Designated EAs for FLOW

• Barrier / Construction Material - Navy
• Medical Supplies - DLA
• Bulk Fuel - DLA
• Rations to include Bottled Water - DLA
• Ground Transportation in Theatre - Army
• Water - Army