g~ rii cPN 2May-June 1990

04 ~C

C>0

Journal of the Defense Systems Management College

~OO~18926
P GPA/ J o u rna l of the Defense

DEFENSE SYSTEMS 2 16

MANAGEMENT Skill In -As Your SOW

COLLEGE Communication: A Statement of Work Something Every Or Source of Woe? ,

Com Manager Should Possess C K Adle, USAF

Major General Lynn H. Stevens,

USA David D. Acker Richard A. Andnws, CPL

wr The second edition is A survey shows problems Gregory T. Wlerzbicki nearing completion. associated with SOW

Dean, fVparnnetM of development are multifaceted Rearch and Infbrraton

Captain Ralph W. Ortengren, Jr., 4 and equally frustrating to

USN -, managers and functional

Dinwor of Pub&atons Contracting Authority experts at all levels.

Robert W. Bail Who Needs rt/

Who Wants It? 26

LtColI Curtis R Cook, USAF Program Managers

Capt George Champlain, USAF With The %ight Stuff

Is there a general concern Dr. Owen C. Gadeken

among program managers Mr. Bernard J. CuUen

that contracting officers are Ms. Nora F. Huvelk

not adequately supporting

program goals? A written In this detailed view of

survey was conducted by the program manager

PROGRAM authors to verify if this competencies, examples are

MANAGER feeling exists, drawn verbatim from 52

interviews.

9

Mas &r ]Dabbling n thel 32 /

Catherine M. Ca k Total Quality

Aswia.- Ear Management

Fther M. Frr Mararet B. Clemens Discussion Guide

D rl/ut Captain, USAF

Janet R. M. Fitzgerald Observations from the Robert W. Ball

author's perspective illustrate Dirctor of Publications

how arduous, bureaucratic An interesting and useful

and time-consuming the DAB way is presented to facilitate

process is. The Total Quality Management

recommendation: Streamline in your group.

the process down to the

Program Manager (ISSN 0199-7114) minimum requirements.

is published bimonthly by the Drefense

Systems Management College, Fort Belvoir. VA 22060-5426. Non-govern. 14

ment employees and organizations may

subscribe at $7.50 annually through the Role of Technology

Superintendent of Documents, U.S.

Government Printing Office. In Communication

Washington, D.C. 20402. Second class

postage paid at Fort Belvoir, VA. Pofessor David D. Acker

POSTMASTER: Send address Dr. 1. Robrt Ainsky

changes to Program Manager, Defense

Systems Management College, Fort The way we communicate,

Belvoir, VA 22060-5426. seek information and obtain

intelligence grows more

complex each day.

Devices/techniques are

discussed.
Vol. XIX, No. 3, DSMC 96

Systems M anagement College

36 40

International -To Testify ,Or Brief

Acquisition Yender Adversity , Management Workshop Robert A. Warren

Richard Kwatnwski Know why you are there,

The Defense Systems your role and your position.

Management College Show quality, clarity and P

launches a new workshop consistency in your answers. Accesion For

covering all aspects of the NTIS CRA&I

negotiation of international 4 3 DTIC TAB 0

defense cooperation Unannounced'

agreements, commonly Non-Commissioned "n

referred to as Memoranda of Ofcer's o e In Justificatiorn

Understanding (MOUs). Acquisition Process R SO*

Senior Master Sergeant B 3 8 Kenneth M. Hitz, USAF DistributioN I

Acquisition Research If properly chosen, trained Availability Codes

Symposium A Success: and assigned, NCOs would

Plans For 1991 and could function in a Avail and/or

highly professional manner in Dist Special Joan L. Sable the acquisition process.

Key professionals address

vital issues facing the . iq

acquisition community.

Also Whenever in this publication "man," men," or their related pronouns appear, either as words or 1991 A cq ---u ion Research 'ymposium 13 parts of words (other than with obvious reference to named male inKey Phone Index 47 dividuals), they have been used for

literary purposes and are meant in

Book Review, Albert M. Bottoms 48 their generic sense.

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402

Program Manager is intended to be a vehicle for the transmission of information on policies, trends, events, and current thinking affecting program management and defense systems acquisition. Stateme.nts of fact or opinion appearing in Program Manager are solely those of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Department of Defense or the Defense Systems Management College. Unless copyrighted, articles may be reprinted. When reprinting, please credit the author and Program Manager, and

forward two copies of the reprinted material to the Director of Publications.

To subscribe, government personnel should submit written requests (using their business addresses) to the Director of Publications.

Manuscripts and other correspondence are welcome and should be addressed to the Director of Publications. Inquiries concerning proposed articles may be

made by phone at (703) 664-5082/-5992 or AUTOVON 354-5062/-5992.

Program Manager 1 May-June 1990
Ii ave you learned to communicate effectively? Do After the sender (transmitter) passes information and

you want to improve on your present skill? If understanding to the receiver, the knowledge of its effect

you are or aspire to be a manager, it is essential that you on the receiver is passed back to the sender in the form of

develop this skill. A manager can't "afford to leave home feedback.

without it." Often, feedback is not verbal in nature or directly obBefore focusing on the new (second) edition of Skill in served. Therefore, the receiver's facial expressions or bodCommunication: A Vital Element in Effective Management, ily gestures provide a basis for judging the success or failure

Defense Systems Management College, let's go back in time of the sender's message.

to the early days of civilization and man's early attempts The sender's efforts to communicate will result in one of

to communicate. It sets a background of man's early recogni- three effects, in terms of the receiver's behavior: a desired

tion of the need to communicate effectively. The story is change, an undesired change or no change. Communicating

fascinating. is successful when it results in a desired change in the

The Beginning receiver's behavior. Communicating is not successful when

it results in an undesired effect. Communication has not been

From the first day humans walked on planet earth, there achieved when there is an absence of any recognizable efhas been a need for effective communication. Early attempts fect on the receiver's behavior.

to communicate were probably by using a few undefined Some form of feedback lets the sender know how his efgestures-non-verbal communication. At some time, peo- forts to communicate affected the receiver and whether to

pie made hideous screeches and howls attempting to transmit modify the messages or let it stand as is.

thoughts. This was the beginning of speech, as we know it.

This led to listening-an art many of us never learned to Barriers

use, but could, with practice. Next, came marking the

ground, and carving and painting on rocks and walls of Students of communication recognize the words we use

caves-first attempts at writing. These latter forms became are a source of strength or weakness in effective communicamore successful as the alphabet came into existence, and tien. Unfortunately, the words we use do not always have

papyrus, parchment, and paper became the medium to use. commonly understood meanings. Some words are amAlthough early hieroglyphics used in ancient Egypt had to biguous and they lead to communicational problems.

be interpreted by a few, when the alphabet was invented Other barriers to communication in organizations, not

messages could be read by many. This was the dawn of based completely on the words we use, are:

reading. -Time Pressure. We tend to use time pressure as an excuse Our spoken and written language has changed through for not communicating with others; however, we must

the years. The language we speak is determined by where recognize that time is a real factor affecting the opportunwe are born and grow up. According to Frederick Bodmer, ity to communicate.

"a child grows up to speak or to write the language used tering. Occu

in the home or at school." Children born in multilingual -Fil teinfoccurs when the sender makes a biased choice

countries grow up using two or more languages, and almost of the information he is going to send.

no one can claim, based on a rational basis that "he is con- -Premature Evaluation. This occurs when the receiver

genitally incapable of becoming a linguist."' makes a quick evaluation of the message based on either

excessive or insufficient input.

The Present -Failure to Listen. This barrier occurs when the listener fails

We consider ourselves relatively sophisticated com- to pay attention to the factual and emotional content of the

municators. This may not be the case. If we analyze the message. Either the factual or the emotional will

various facets of communication, we will see there is much predominate; however, the receiver may overlook one in

to learn. When we consider some of the basics, we can iden- favor of the other.

tify our need to improve our communication abilities. -Psychological Distance. Psychological distance (such as

What is communication? It is the passing of information between the engineering and the manufacturing organizaand understanding from one person to another. It involves, tion) is sometimes exaggerated by unwarranted use of status

as a minimum, transmitting the message and receiving it. symbols.

Program Manager 2 May-June 1990
Principal Subjects Covered in Book understanding the message received, torted messages. Further, this chapter

The following comments are iden- Accordingly, some practical sugges- indicates that managers must be good

tified with the chapter to which they tions for effective listening are message "receivers" and tuned-in to

pertain in the second edition of the presented. In addition, barriers to ef- non-verbal messages, as well as to oral

book. fective listening are pointed out. and written messages.

Chapter 1. Introduction. Corn- Chapter VIII. Reading Skills. Effi- Chapter XV. Summary. The final

munication is defined and communica- ient reading is defined. Techniques for chapter highlights the important facets a improving your reading rate are dis- of the communication process. Ex- tion milestones through the ages are cussed along with the barriers to effi- amples of the major purposes of in- identified. cient reading. How to make a decision teractive communication are included.

Chapter 11. The Communication to read or not to read something is in- Finally, the spotlight is placed on what

Process. Communication is a com- cluded in this chapter. the future holds for us relative to complicated, two-way process. This municating effectively.

chapter identifies and describes the Chapter IX. The Importance of

principal facets of the process. Questions. Questions play a vital role Final Thoughts

Chapter 111. Writing Skills. A highly in effective communication. Questions When a communication problem developed and very complicated aspect most helpful in improving the com- of communication-writing skills-is munication process are discussed, arises, or the need to improve your facility in communication becomes apdealt with in this chapter. The basic Probing and confrontational questions parent, the second edition of this book

steps in preparing a proposal, report, are highlighted, should provide helpful and pertinent

staff paper, or article for publication Chapter X. Communication Bar- information. Although it was never the

are set forth. The "polishing" process riers. The principal barriers to effective intention of the Defense Systems

and judging the effectivness of the final communication, and how to overcome Management College to provide an exproduct are discussed. them, are included here. The need for haustive treatment of the subject of efChapter IV. Speaking Skills. Part of feedback is emphasized. fective communication, it was inevery manager's time is devoted to the Chapter XI. Communicating Within tended that this book provide sufficient

presentation of plans and ideas. This the Organization. Communication chan- information to be responsive to the

chapter discusses presentation strat- nels are important in the development of communicative needs of program

egies, organization of thoughts, any organizational structure. The for- management and other management

language, delivery, and visual and mal and informal communication pro- personnel; students, faculty, and staff

other presentation aids. cesses are described, as is the "grape- at the College; and members of the

Chapter V. Audio and Video Pre- vine" (unofficial) process. Further, general community.

sentation Skills. Today, more com- some good approaches to solving corn- Copies of the book will be issued to

munications of an informational na- munication problems are presented. students in DSMC courses. Other peoture are transmitted by audio recor- Chapter XII. Conducting Successful pie may obtain copies of the book

dings and video tapes than ever before. Meetings. Meetings are essential and can from the U.S. Government Printing

The recordings and tapes are used serve as an effective method of corn- Office (GPO). As of this writing, the

before sophisticated audiences; there- munication within an organization. The order number and the cost of a copy

fore, the presenter should know the proces6 and problems of planning and of the book sold by the GPO have not

"rules of the game." This chapter running meetings are included in this been determined.

discusses the rules-those required for chapter. The role of the chairman is Endnote

effective presentations. given special attention.

Chapter Vi. Non-Verbal Coin- Chapter XIII. Role of Technology in 1. Frederick Bodmer, "The Loom of

munication Skills. In person-to-person Communication. The way people Language," (New York: W. W. Norcommunications the messages are sent communicate, seek information, and ton and Company, Inc., 1944).

at two-levels simultaneously: verbal obtain intelligence is changing radiand non-verbal. Actions sometimes cally. Some devices/techniques being

speak so loudly that the spoken words used (such as the computer, telephone, Professor Acker is a senior member of the

are lost. In this chapter, the elements radio, television, FAX machine, and rsearch staff in the Deputment of Research

of non-verbal communication are tele- and video-conferencing) are and Information at the Deftnse Smems

placed in focus: facial expressions, eye discussed. Manaement CoUlege. Much of the matecostionne of voice, body language, Chapter XIV. Communicating Effec- rialin this article will be added to the second

positioning in groups, and others. tively as a Manager. This chapter is edition of his widely acclaimed book Skill in

Chapter VII. Listening Skills. This devoted to the importance of commun- Communication: A Vital Element in

chapter focuses on the receiver-the ication to management success, and in- Effective Management planned for

one who provides feedback to the dicates that effective managers send publ c

ation in 1990.

sender. Good listening requires clear, concise, accurate, and undisProgram Manager 3 May-June 1990
CONTRACTING AUTHORITY:

WHO NEEDS IT? WHO WANTS IT?

Lieutenant Colonel Curtis R Cook, USAF

Captain George Champlain, USAF

S ometimes the truth hurts. The Department of Defense The contracting officer is not well enough inhas essentially no generic, large-scale engineering formed on the technology involved in the

capability. Contractors conceive, design, develop, and pro- acquisition. He doesn't understand the ball

duce every major weapon system in the inventory. Program game.

managers have but one path to success, and that is through The contracting officer delays the process. For

the contracting officer example, he holds up the procurement request

The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) gives sole for additional justification when the sole source

authority to enter into contracts on behalf of the govern- is obvious.

ment to the contracting officer. Yet the program manager, The contracting officer holds too much authornot the contracting officer, is responsible for the overall suc- ity, considering most of the negotiated issues

cess of the program. directly impact the program.

In most cases, the contracting officer is not even in the The contracting officer attempts to extract

program manager's direct chain of command. Program dollars from the contractual agreement, even

managers typically work in a matrix organization, where though it is established that the entire project is

the classical single chain of command structure is abandoned underfunded.

in favor of a multiple command structure (Davis and

Lawrence, 1977:3). Authority is split between the functional The contracting officer is slow in his reaction to

division with its emphasis on support activities, and the pro- changes.

ject team with its emphasis on program success (Cleland,

1984:260). This complicates the program manager's taskhow can he or she "motivate" the contracting officer to do The Study

what the program manager wants done? To verify whether this feeling exists among practicing Air

As most program managers would probably agree, it isn't Force program managers, and to determine what corrective

always easy, or even possible, to get the contracting officer action might be appropriate if the condition does exist, the

to move in the direction or at the speed the program manager authors conducted a study of program directors and

wants. These feelings have been expressed in a number of contracting officers in Air Force Systems Command (AFSC).

ways, but some of the more common (and publishable) ones Specifically, the study sought to answer these questions:

include the following: "Why doesn't the program manager Who should have contracting authority-program managers

have contracting officer authority?" "The world would be or contracting officers7 What impact would shifting

much simpler if the pregram manager could direct contrac- contracting authority to program managers have on contors to accomplish program goals." "It would sure be easier tract compliance, program management efficiency, organizato keep the program on track if the program manager didn't tional conflict, and relations with the contractor7 What

have to go through the contracting officer for every little action could or should be taken to improve contracting

thing." support of programs if it is perceived to be unsatisfactory?

These comments express a general concern among pro- A written survey of all program directors and procuring

gram managers that contracting officers are not adequately contracting officers (PCOs) in AFSC was conducted in May

supporting program goals. A 1983 study by Naval Sea 1989 by the authors. The directors surveyed were those in

Systems Command produced similar findings. The study charge of major weapon systems (54 colonels and generals);

sought to determine the nature of the conflict between con- the contracting officers, 310 altogether, were those

tracting officers and program managers. The Navy report designated by AFSC as PCOs. The response rate was high

contained the following quotations from command for both groups: 48 program directors and 216 PCOs

executives about contracting officers: (Sherman, 1987:82). returned completed questionnaires. The survey consisted of

Program Manager 4 May-June 1990
TABLE 1. DnECTOR PROFILE

FIGURE 1. EDUCATION LEVEL OF PCOr AND DIRECTORS

100

80

60 -

40

20-

0-

MASTERS DOCTORATE UNDERGRAD LAW SOME POST

DEGREE GRAD

PCOS m m PROGRAM DIRECTORS

TABLE 2. DIRECTOR PROFILE (ems't)

34 questions, including a request for comments. Participants The field of study for both groups is shown in Table 2.

were asked to indicate their agreement with statements The preponderance of business degrees among PCOs and

given, based on a seven-point Likert scale. The responses. engineering degrees among directors is noteworthy. One

were analyzed and are presented below, cause for conflict between contracting officers and directors

may be due to this difference in educational backgrounds What is the profile of a "typical" program director and (to the extent that engineers see the world differently from

contracting officer? Tables 1 and 2, and Figures 1 through business or other non-technical "types").

3 provide part of the answer.

Every PCO and director had at least a 4-year college

degree. It is striking that 16.7 percent (8 of 48) of the program directors had doctoral degrees, and the remainder had

master's degrees-quite impressive.

Program Manager 5 May-June 1990
The experience level of the defense

acquisition work force has been called

into question by the Packard CommisFIGURE 2. PCO EXPERIENCE sion and others (President's Commission, 1986:5-6). Figures 2 and 3,

PERCENTAGE however, show that within AFSC,

35 both groups are very experienced.

The most surprising finding was the

30 .. small number of directors who actually

25. wanted contracting authority. With all

the discussion of the lack of authority

20 to carry out their considerable responsibilities, only 10 of the 48 directors

15 - said they wanted a contracting officer

1warrant, as shown in Figure 4. In their

written comments, most directors

5 stated pertise they simply didn't have the ex- or the time to handle contrac0 ting chores, with its myriad laws,

1-3 4-6 7-10 11-15 10 and Over regulations and procedures. (It is very

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE interesting to note that virtually none

of the contracting officers said that

program managers should have

FIGURE 3. DIRECTOR EXPERLENCE warrants!)

Despite the low number who wanted

PERCENTAGE warrants, Table 3 shows that a large

35 -number of program directors did feel

program office efficiency could be in30 - - ---- ----- creased, organizational conflict reduced, and contractual relations improv25 ed if they had contracting authority.

They simply did not have the time to

do the contracting and manage the

program. In addition, directors felt

that having the authority would not

10 .- erode contract compliance (many commented that compliance would be im-

- -proved if they had a warrant).

0 1-3 Contracting officers, on the other 4- 7-10 11-15 16 and Over hand, felt just the opposite. Most strikYEARS OF EXPERIENCE ing is their feelings that contract com- pliance would be severely eroded if

program directors had contracting

authority.

FIGURE 4. DIRECTORS DESIRE FOR WARRANT These differences are interesting. In

their written comments, an over- PERCENTAGE whelming majority of PCOs stated

0 that they act as the check and balance

system between program directors and

so .prime contractors in the sense that they

60 -, " .prevent the two from getting "too

close." Not a single program director,

however, commented on the necessity 40 "-or presence of such a regulating influence.

20Judging from the differing opinions

on these key issues, it is no wonder

that a certain amount of conflict exists

0 between program managers and con- YES NO NO OPINION tracting officers. The question remains,

however, whether that conflict is

PROGRAM DIRECTOR DESIRE FOR WARRANT detrimental to program success.

Program Manager 6 May-June 1990
TABLE 3. IMPACT OF SHFrING AUTHORITT TO FGM DIRECTORS

Conclusion Program directors want adequate mission, 1986:5-6). The Packard

The matrix organizational structure contracting support, not warrants. Report was challenged in a 1987 study

appears to work well in the complex How do PCOs feel about the prospect of contract managers in the National

environment of defense acquisition, of contracting authority in the hands Contract Management Association.

despite a moderate level of conflict be- of the program manager? In one In that study, Cook found the

tween program directors and PCOs. word-opposed. The PCOs were 23,000-member NCMA population to

Most directors recognized the high strongly against program directors be well-educated, experienced, and exdegree of knowledge, training, and ex- having any contracting authority. ceptionally well-trained in contracting

pertise required to effectively exercise Almost every PCO commented that areas (Cook, 1987). The study did not

contracting authority, as shown by the the check and balance system built into address the qualifications of program

following program director comments: defense acquisition (via the matrix managers.

In my opinion, most program organization) works well and is vital The current study supports Cook's

to the integrity of the weapon systems findings. Air Force program directors directors do not have the train- acquisition process. The following and PCOs are both highly educated

ing to be PCOs, and should not comment from a PCO is typical of and experienced. All 48 program direcbe warranted, many others: tors surveyed had at least master's

I believe program directors are deg re e d h ad atctoa tes.a m ong

not knowledgeable or experienc- If you give a program director a degrees, and 8 held doctorates. Among

ed enough to get or have a war- contracting officer warrant, you the PCOs, all had at least underrant. But most importantly, it take away the check and balance graduate degrees, about half had

would be a tremendous burden of the system and allow too master's, and seven held law degrees.

on them and a potential for much authority in the hands of The experience level of both groups

abuse due to conflicts which arise one individual. was also impressive, as shown in

daily. Most PCOs were also strongly op- Figures 2 and 3. Among PCOs, 62 perRather than exercise contracting posed to working directly for the pro- cent had more than 11 years acquisiauthority, a large number of directors gram director. As one PCO put it: tion experience (31 percent had more

suggested another, more reasonable, Contracting authority (for than 16 years experience), while 53

alternative-that PCOs should work PCOs) should be increased. At percent of the directors also had more

directly for them, aq opposed to being the present time, contracting of- than 11 years (29 percent had more

matrixed: ficers have a lot of responsibility, than 16 years). A great majority-90.2

The issue is not who has the war- but very little actual authority. percent of PCOs and 84 percent of prorant; the issue is who does the From my experience, contracting grant directors-had at least 7 years

PCO work for. I want a trained, authority should not be in the acquisition experience.

professional PCO working for program office, and contracting The notion that program directors

me, not for DCS/Contractsl I officers should not work directly should have contracting authority is

have been a program director from the program director. not popular with either group. Conwith a PCO working for me, and In the area of experience and educa- tracting officers like the matrix struca director with the PCO work- tion, the findings of this report appear ture, with the PCO reporting to the

ing for DCS/Contracts and to contradict those of the Packard functional contracting chief. Their

matrixed to me. I much prefer Commission. The Packard Commis- comments seem to reflect a fear that

the former; it was more efficient, sion characterized the acquisition work program directors would use direct

more productive, and more force as undertrained, undereducated, supervisory authority to try to coerce

responsive, and inexperienced (President's Corn- them into "breaking the rules."

Program Manager 7 May-June 1990
Program directors were nearly investigating ways to streamline the Federal Acquisition Regulation Coununanimous in their opinion that PCOs acquisition process. Whether it will cil. Federal Acquisition Regulation.

should retain contracting authority, succeed in reducing the irritating ad- Parts 1 and 34. Washington: GovernMost simply want more, or better, ministrative reviews, approvals, and ment Printing Office, April 1984.

support to keep their programs on unnecessary steps so often commented Fox, J. Ronald. The Defense Managetrack. They also want a direct input to on by both program directors and ment Challenge: Weapons Acquisi- the PCO's performance report to keep PCOs remains to be seen. All survey tion. Boston: Harvard Business School

the PCO's priorities aligned with their participants agreed on one thing-the Press, 1988.

own. The following comments sum- matter of the placement of contracting

marize these points, officer authority is irrelevant unless Arming America. Cambridge, MA:

A PD doesn't have the time something is done to reduce the cur- Harvard University Press, 1974.

or the education to be a PCO, or rent bureaucratic roadblocks to sen- General Accounting Office. DOD Acthe chief engineer, or the direc- sible systems acquisition. quisition: Strengthening Capabilities of

tor for program control, etc.- Bibliography Key Personnel in Systems Acquisition.

that's why he has a team-there GAO/NSIAD-86-45. Washington:

are no conflicts if there is team- Albanese, Robert. Management: Government Printing Office, May

work. Every 0-6, 0-7, 0-8 PD will Toward Accountability for Perfor- 1986.

establish effective teamwork or mnRichard D. Knight, Kenneth. Matrix Managehe will not be a PD for long! 36 Irwin, Inc., 1975. ment. New York: PBI-Petrocelli

The problem is not where the Block, Captain John R. and Captain Books, 1977.

warrant resides, it is too few Gordon E. Hadlow. The Authority

qualified PCOs. Relationships of Contracting Officers Meier, Kenneth J. and Jeffrey L.

donlieve is ain a Project/Program Management En- Brudney. Applied Statistics for Public

I don't believe it's a matter of vironment. MS Thesis SLSR 10-75A. Administration. Boston: Duxbury

who has contracting authority as School of Systems and Logistics, Air Press, 1981.

much as it is the lack of PCOs, Force Institute of Technology (AU), The President's Blue Ribbon Commisand the enormous bureaucracy Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, January sion on Defense Management. A Forto get something on contract that 1975 (AD-A006338). mula for Action--A Report to the

hinders the acquisition process.

Program offices should have Cavanagh, John and Paul G. President on Defense Acquisition.

organic contracting capability, Dembling. "AD HOC Report: The Washington, D.C.: Government Printincluding PCOs, to keep DOD Contracting Officer, "Program ing Office, 1986.

priorities aligned and require Manager, 82: 29-33 (March/April Sherman, Stanley N. Contract

PCOs to identify with program 1988). Management: Post Award.

priorities. The Deputy for Con- Cleland, David I. Matrix Management Gaithersburg, MD: Wordcrafters

tracting should be policy and Systems Handbook. New York: Van Publications, 1987.

technical assistance .... The issue Nostrand Reiiihold Co., Inc., Terry, George R. and Stephen G.

is aligned priorities. 1984. Franklin. Principles of Management,

This study asked program directors Cook, Curtis R. A Study of Decision- Eighth Edition. Homewood, IL:

and contracting officers what they Making Processes in the Practice of Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1982.

thought about vesting program direc- Federal Contract Management. Doc- Thybony, William W. Government

tors with contracting authority. A toral Dissertation. School of Govern- Contracting Based on the Federal Achealthy response rate showed that ment and Business Administration, quisition Regulation (FAR) (And the

AFSC acquisition professionals care The George Washington University, Competition in Contracting Act of

deeply about the topic and, as might Washington, D.C., July 1987. 1984), Second Revision. Reston, VA:

be expected, most respondents provide Davis, Stanley M. and Paul R. Thybony, Inc., 1987.

written comments. Program directors Lawrence, et al. Matrix. Reading, MA:

and PCr)s agree that the warrant Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.,,

should stay with the contracting of- 1977. Lieuteant Colonel Cook, Ph.D., is an

ficer, but disagree on where the PCO Assistant Profeso of Contmacting Mangshould be placed in the organization. Dillman, Don A. Mail and Telephone ment, Air Force Institute of Technologjy, Surveys: The Total Design Method. Wr't-Paaeron AFB, Ohio. He is the

One consistent theme voiced by New York: John Wiley and Sons, rgram Man rAF O HI's Graduate

directors and PCOs was the frustration 1978. S Manage fo r nda

both felt with the bureaucratic federal Systems Ma/ eet Pro~jrm and a

procurement process. While that topic Emory, C. Williams. Business graduate of PMC 82-I, DSMC.

was not directly addressed by this Research Methods. Third Edition. Captain Champlain, M.S., is a Constudy, procurement reform has been Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, tnct Adiinisktm , Air Force Plant

explored in great detail by various 1985. RepmTsenive 0ffie, Boeing Company,

commissions throughout the years. Fayol, Henri. General and Industrial Seatl, Washin"tn. He isa 1989groduate

The current effort-the Defense Management. Toronto, Canada: Sir of the AFIT contractiV mangement

Management Review-is once again Isaac Pitman and Sons, Ltd., 1949. mastr's degee prapm.

Program Manager 8 May-June 1990
The vic-as ex restcd in this artich arv ' th , tI , h, ,

aid do not r.flect the o ficial policl or po.it10 f l?

Department of Deteizsc or the U.5. (oi,erpmit

DABBLING IN THE DAB PROCESS

Captain Margaret B. Clemens, (ISAF

T he Joint Tactical Information Distribution System allocated to meet everyone's demands. There was little com-

(JTIDS) Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) IIIA was promise between individuals and the TEMP is still a subcompleted successfully September 7, 1989. Preparation ject of controversy.

began formally in January 1989, 8 months before the DAB; The Manpower Estimate Report was submitted just within

planning for the acquisition strategy and testing had been its suspense, as "no impact"; it would have been late had

underway longer. there been an impact. Additionally, requests for reports from

As the Headquarters Air Force Systems Command action the other Services were initiated late, not until June, and

officer, I gained insight into the DAB process by observing it appears the unwritten policy now is that reports will

it as applied to JTIDS. There had been much Office of the always be "no impact." We know we are not going to get

Secretary of Defense attention to streamlining: Yet, the additional manpower authorizations, yet we don't give them

following lessons-learned illustrate how arduous, bureau- up. This entire effort is simply a paperwork exercise.

cratic and time-consuming the DAB process still is. These Numerous documents (Acquisition Program Baseline

observations, from my perspective, (not representing the (APB), ASR(CAS), Decision Coordinating Paper (DCP),

-views of the Air Force) are divided into three main areas: ICA Report, Program Briefing) all are submitted separately

documents, process and JTIDS issues. Specific examples are and at separate times; yet, they all contain funding and cost

not intended as accusations but as illustrations to help peo- information and procurement quantities, frequently in difpie in the process and people improving the process. ferent formats and units (e.g., with or without spares). The

numbers often changed even after the documents had been

Documents submitted and there was a great deal of confusion when the

documents were not consistent. My recommendation is that

The Acquisition Strategy Report (Competitive Alternative the ASR(CAS) should be submitted with the acquisition plan

Sources) (ASR(CAS)), the Cooperative Opportunities Docu- and consistency with the later ICA costs not be required.

ment, and the Common Use Alternatives Statement (all re- The cost annexes should be deleted from the DCP and the

quired by DODI 5000.2) are submitted before the DAB; information in the APB referenced. The DCP has the APB

however, these contain information pertinent to determina- as an attachment which presents the cost, funding, and

tion of the appropriate acquisition strategy required long quantities information in one place with only one format.

before the DAB. I recommend these documents be submitted This would reduce the confusion and last-minute rewrites.

as part of the acquisition plan. Process

The ASR(CAS) is a cost analysis of alternative acquisition strategies. As currently required, it is submitted before Planning Meetings. Five Services action officers planning

the DAB, concurrent with the Independent Cost Analysis meetings were held January-June 1989 (Chart 1). Often, in-

(ICA). Because consistency of the cost numbers is so im- formation volunteered about the DAB process was wellportant, the ASR(CAS) cannot be finalized until after the intentioned but wrong. Most attendees had not experienced

final ICA review at the Office of the Secretary of Defense. a DAB and did not know the information was erroneous.

For JTIDS, this was long after the document was due to the One Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) said his office

Air Staff. I recommend that the program office cost estimate was the appropriate OPR to brief the user requirement beshould be acceptable as a basis for the ASR(CAS). cause JTIDS has numerous users, not just the Tactical Air

Command. It seemed sensible at the time but, at the last

The Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) has become minute, the AFSARC Secretariat said "no," and TAC had

an all-encompassing program management plan versus a to give the briefing, having short notice to prepare. An admaster test planning document. Information on all program ditional problem was that many action officers did not take

aspects was required to be included in the TEMP until this action items from these meetings as formal direction. They

document was two inches thick. Numerous test planning required a message or waited for written direction before

working groups discussed how available resources could be responding.

Program Manager 9 May-June 1990
Four OSD action officers planning

meetings were held February-June 1989

(Chart 1). There was not consistent atCHART 1. DAB PLANNING MEETINGS tendance from appropriate OSD action

officers. If the JTIDS OPR could not

attend, he would send someone to take

notes, keeping issues from getting surDATE ATTENDEES faced or resolved in a timely manner.

19JanS0 " Services

03 Feb 89 Seric The OSD action officers did not

13 Feb 89 OSD come prepared to help the program

03 Mar 89 Services through the DAB "gauntlet." They

10 Mar 89 OSD view themselves as the DAB gauntlet

28 Apr 89 Services and came to collect information for

01 May 89 08D their positions. Giving them informa01 Jun 89 Services tion early did not seem to help later

02 Jun 89 OSD because they wanted last-minute, upto-date information to write papers for

their bosses right before the DAB committee and DAB meetings. The action

CHART 2. PROGRAM/DWSIG BRIEFINGS officers are working many programs at

once and the most important program

is the one closest to a DAB, so that is

DATE ORGANIZATION the one they work. Your program is

low priority until the month before

07 Jun 89 E80CCITC your DAB. The OSD action officers

12 Jun 89 -WAALC= 1 were not helpful in resolving issues up

13 Jun 80' SAFM ," front and, in fact, most would not

19 Jun W - Alft review drafts of documents.

21OJW,*t AAW

2 JturI AP&A SOWRL

13Jm s A.. . My recommendation is that the

02 Aug I* DWJ cognizant OSD committee action officer should act as the central control

point for all of OSD, answering the

easy questions, filtering the other quesCHART 3. INDEPENDENT COST ANALYSIS tions and working the interface between the Service headquarters and

OSD. Many questions were the same

and some were of such great detail that

DATE-- , V A.II CI , the answer was four pages long. Someone needs to determine which ques-

" ... tions are appropriate and necessary to

support a DAB decision consistent

A .with OSD's role of oversight. To han28 Jdft .- die this deluge of requests for JTIDS,

the Joint Program Office (JPO) sent

," ..... someone to work full-time in the

, .Pentagon for a week before the S-"" AFSARC and again before the DAB ''" "'" committee meeting to act as a single

.'' focal point to gather the questions and

task the appropriate JPO office to prepare a point paper, as well as to update

briefing charts with all last-minute

changes, mostly in funding and cost.

Program Manager 10 May-June 1990
Briefing Requirements

The JTIDS briefing requirements

were much less than usual for a joint

program. Only three additional brief- CHART 4. 7TST RESUILTS BRIEFINGS

ings were required by the other Services, and most briefings were conducted jcintly. However, 35 formal. '?- ,' 

briefings that directly supported the

DAB were still required. There was

also an increase in the number of other

briefings and meetings as interest in

program status by outside organizations increased due to the approaching

DAB. The large number of briefings "

required is due in part to the number

of different briefings required for ';'i -,; ,/i

various functional areas: test, cost, .- , logistics (Defense Weapons Systems

Improvement Group (DWSIG)), as

well as the overall program briefing.

Each functional briefing had its own CHART 5. PROGRAMf BRIEFINGS

briefing trail; most of these trails were

started three months before the DAB

(Charts 2-6). Some of these briefings . could be eliminated by having an

organization's action officer staff all of

the briefings below the commander's

level.

The program manager will brief

anyone whom he thinks could hinder

the decision. The program manager ** ';.

believes, rightly so, that he can best

reduce the risk of a poor DAB decision -,.-. :. ,.

by personally explaining to each "naysayer" why his approach is the best

choice. This generated a lot of informal briefings given at the eleventh CHART 6. SPECIAL TOPICS

hour. In fact, the JTIDS PD and PEM

both spent the morning and afternoon

on the day of the AFSARC, the DAB ' :" 

Committee and the DAB giving informal (uncounted) briefings to key

players.

The requirement for a threat briefing to Defense Intelligence Agency

(DIA) is redundant. The briefing is

given after DIA validates the System

Threat Assessment Report (STAR).

The AF/IN recommended that the program element monitor (PEM) give this

briefing. It is non-productive to brief

the experts on a product they have

already approved. My recommendation is that this briefing requirement be

eliminated.

Program Manager 11 May-June 1990
Independent Reviews. They come documents are to be prepared or up- no intention of buying more JTIDS for

out of the woodwork. Because JTIDS' dated at a milestone as appropriate F-15s beyond the OSD-directed equipnumber-one issue is reliability, ESD timing but not as a suspense (such as age of 20 aircraft. The surprise was

had early independent reviews of the the Security Management Plan, Sys- that OSD brought this up at the DAB

reliability performed by ESD/PL and tems Engineering Management Plan, as unacceptable and wanted TAC to

MITRE as preparation for the DAB. In etc.) either buy more or transfer the F-15

order to prepare their positions for the terminals to the Navy. This had not

Air Force Weapons Systems Improve- JTIDS Issues been viewed as an issue when preparment Group (AFWSIG), both Warner Reliability Growth Plan and Crite- ing for the DAB because the Air Force

Robins Air Logistics Center (WRALC) ria. This has been a known issue for was following current OSD direction.

and Air Force Acquisition Logistics several years. The problem was that Frequency Clearance. Frequency

Center (AFALC) also did independent the working level could agree on a plan clearance for operational use was

reviews. The Navy did an independent early, but approval required agree- legally required before the DAB. This

review in April; then, in June, SAF/AQ ment at a higher level and the higher- was a known problem and was dilirequested AF/LE-RD do an indepen- ups did not get involved until right gently worked by the JPO, Air Staff

dent review of the reliability, before the DAB. When they don't and OSD. The approval was due by

A Production Readiness Review agree with the current plan, all pre- June 30 and OSD didn't call the

(PRR) was done in May to assess if the vious work goes down the drain and National Telecommunications and Incontractors were ready for production. last-minute negotiations drive the formation Administration (above the

The product engineering service officer process. working level) until the end of July

(PESO) participated in this review. Warranty. During the DAB prepara- despite promises to elevate the issue by

Then, in July, Air Staff personnel did tions, there were issues on the struc- July 5. There also seemed to be some

another independent review to deter- ture of the warranty. The JTIDS war- grandstanding involved: The condimine if the program was ready for ranty includes contractor logistics sup- tional approval was delayed until the

production. port as a separate contract line item last minute.

The reviews are unscheduled and number (CLIN). During the Acquisioccupy a large amount of time from tion Strategy Pane, briefing, it was

the SPO and contractor personnel just noted that O&M funds would prob- Could Issues Have Been

when they are busy with DAB prepa- ably be required for these repairs. The Resolved Earlier?

rations and a transition to the next warranty was reviewed by HQ AFSC

phase. The bottom line appears to be and found to be sufficient, legal and The warranty and reliability growth

that no one trusts someone else's in- consistent with ESD's own warranty plan should have been ironed out

dependent assessment. guidelines. Although there may have earlier but they illustrate two common

My recommendation is that at the been other ways to write this war- problems to resolving issues early.

first DAB planning meeting all in- ranty, the controversy appeared to be First, there is not good communication

dependent reviews required should be the result of personalities that between the decision-makers and their identified and tasked to an organiza- disagreed earlier and then used the staff officers-the people making real

tion at the lowest level that will be ac- DAB review process as a way to get decisions work the issues right before

ceptable to all decision-makers. These a new hearing on their point of the DAB and, frequently, the staff does

reviews should not be reaccomplished view. not know what their organizations'

DAB issues will be; two, the DAB

at each level of the management chain. Navy Funding Versus ICA Costs. gives an opportunity for points of view

One of the difficulties of a joint pro- that have been ignored or overruled to

Governing Regulations gram is working funding issues when resurface and be argued again. The

There are no current AF regulations the other Services control their own Navy funding problem will not be

that implement DODI 5000.2. Conse- funding. In this particular case, the resolved until proposals are received

quently, there is no right way/ Navy disagreed with the joint ICA but it could have been shelved earlier

approved guideline to use in preparing team's cost estimate and maintained if the ICA had been completed earlier

the documents and determining who that the JTIDS units would be cheaper in the process. The F-15 requirement

coordinates, signs, or approves them, and that the AF was overbudgeted. issue was a surprise although draft proEveryone has a different opinion; the The ICA team's point of view was that gram budget decisions (PBD) from last

draft regulations were in constant re- the Navy was underfunded. This issue year did indicate that OSD thought 20

vision so there was no consistent ref- did not arise until the ICA estimate F-15s were enough. The frequency clearerence. The only answer seems to be was final and has not yet been re- ance issue illustrates the difficulty of

whatever OSD wants is what is re- solved; however, it was not addressed working with agencies outside of

quired. Additionally, it was difficult to at the DAB. DOD: They have no motivation to redistinguish which documents are re- Lack of F-15 Requirement. This was solve the issues early and it is difficult

quired for a DAB (such as the DCP, an unstaffed issue brought up at the to get the issue elevated until it is

COD, ASR(CAS), etc.) versus which DAB. All players knew that TAC had critical.

(See CLEMENS, page 25)

Program Manager 12 May-June 1990
1991 ACQUISITION RESEARCH SYMPOSIUM

A C Q U I S IT IO N F O R T H E F U T U R E

Imagination, Innovation, and Implementation

JUNE 4-6, 1991

Sheraton National Hotel, Arlington, Virginia

The symposium will be co-sponsored by the

Defense Systems Management College and the

Washington, D.C. Chapter of the

National Contract Management Association.

CilLL FOR ABSTRACTS ATTENTION

OF PAPERS EVERYONE

Submit a one-page typewritten abstract by July Selection of abstracts, exhibits, and demon20, 1990. Include title, author(s), address strations will be based on their relevancy and phone numbers. Send to: to current issues in acquisition management.

DSMC-DRI-R (ARS), Special consideration will be given to topics conFort Belvoir, VA 22060-5426. cerning international aspects of acquisition and

implementation of previous or current acquisition research efforts.

CALL FOR EXHIBITSNU

AND DEMONSTRATIONS

Submit proposals by July 20, 1990. Include ADDITIONAL

name, agency, address and phone numbers.

Send to: INFORMATION

Ms. Donna S. Ireton Contact Mr. Calvin Brown or Ms. Joan L. Sable,

Advanced Systems Development, Inc. DSMC, (703) 664-3385 (Autovon 354-3385) or Edwin

2800 Shirlington Road, Suite 800 L. Phelps (NCMA) at (703) 379-2900. Agenda and

Arlington, VA 22206 registration information will be distributed.

Program Manager 13 May-June 1990
ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY

IN COMMUNICATION

Professor David D. Acker

Dr. J Robert Ainsley

he way people are communicating, s~ki~g information and obtaining intelligence is chanifg-radically.

Today, telephone lines are carrying more thn voice conversations. They are carrying high-quality teleision pictures

and things like electrical impulses necessary tmake possi- Computer

ble remote electrocardiogram heart diagnosis. 9(be t Lucky, The computer is a widely used instrument today. ElecAmerican Telephone and Telegraph, said he blieved high tronic mail (E-mail) software allows users to send notes to

fidelity text, music, animation, sensory data, Ight, color, other users in a fast and organized manner. E-mail messages

remote control commands, information from cdmpAterized are coordinated/sent to specific individuals without fear of

bases, communications between personal compptet's, video losing information in the distribution system. Messages can

games, music videos, the news, facsimile (FAX) copies of be tagged to indicate to the sender that the receiver read he

documents, numbers and instructions would beirculating note. No more... "It must have been misplaced." Word prothrough the (telephone) network as disembcofied bits of cessing, spreadsheets and data base management packages

information. He added, "I'd like to think of t4 telephone make information transmittal easier to perform. New pronetwork as something that puts you in touch with a larger grams increase efficiency in how we organize, analyze and

intelligence. Whether human intelligence-'ingly or in present information. Using communication software allows

groups-or computer intelligence, I'm talking about acces- the sending of large documents via telephone lines fast and

sing intelligence." efficiently. Transmittal of information is significantly faster

It is obvious that as society grows more'complex, so do than line catalogs mail delivered and bulletin by the United boards States allow Postal us to Service. order goods Oncommunications. This can be attributed partially to ex-and services and learn new ways to use the computer for

ponential growth of new knowledge in almost every area communication.

of professional knowledge. Vannevar Bush, Franklin D.

Roosevelt's science advisor, was probably the first person Telephone

to recognize the impact of this phenomenon on effective The telephone, a central part of modern communications,

communication in an article appearing in the 1945 Atlantic. is a useful tool at home and work. We cannot perform effecHe suggested development of the Memex machine to tively without using this instrument. The popularity of the

enhance the communication process by providing quick ac- cellular telephone, which allows us to conduct conversations

cess to large data bases of information. Since then, with others while driving to and from work or while

technological innovations have enhanced communications, working in the backyard, is increasing.

Some of the devices/techniques being used with marketable

success are the computer, telephone, radio, television, FAX Technological capability of the telephone is expanding.

machine, teleconferencing and videoconferencing. We are Telephones are available with a memory to store telephone

becoming electronically interdependent. Relationships being numbers and invoke them automatically; to talk or to hear

formed across international boundaries were not possible without using a handpiece; to answer a call without being

a few years ago. present; to determine the number of an incoming call; and

to take several calls at once. Some telephones have features

It is important to note that these tools and techniques will normally reserved for businesses like intercom and connot, simply by their use, result in effective communication, ference calling. Allen M. Steward, vice-president of GTE

Essential ingredients for effective communication must be Corporation, believes that just as the Touch-Tone surpasses

present when using the technology. Although we use the the rotary-dial telephone, new technology will make Touchtelephone to talk to someone, we need good communica- Tone beeps obsolete. Research and development comtions skills. The telephone serves only to enhance the pro- munication initiatives concerning the handicapped provide

cess; technology, which is an enhancing mechanism, is good technology making communications easier. These features

only when we apply it effectively, improve our ability to communicate more effectively.

Program Manager 14 May-June 1990
Value of Technological Advances

Advances in technology are altering

opinions on local, state, national and ways people relate and communicate.

international issues. The radio is a We may be less inhibited when commedium through which public opinion municating through technology, and

A ccording to a is shaped. The radio informs us about tend to be less self-aware. Although we

the availability of goods and services may develop a "me-and-my-machine" Stanford University through creative advertisements and, feeling, we cannot forget people receivimportantly, it educates us. ing our outputs.

Television In face-to-face situations, we see the

computer scientist., Television speaker's smile or he place he takes at Television is probably the most a meeting, giving a cue to his status.

by the turn of the powerful influence in our daily lives. In computer exchanges we have no In addition to the features offered by such feedback. We may be "blind" to

radio, television provides us real-life recipients' backgrounds and knowlcentury, there will pictures of current events. Seeing cur- edge; therefore, it is imperative that the

rent events in the world has brought message being transmitted be as clear

be telephones people of many nations closer as possible. together; watch history unfold instead

smarter than the of reading about it. While there is still When using a computer to send Ea long way to go, television is break- mail, we do not see the receiver and

ing down cultural barriers. Television do not get non-verbal cues. There are

people using them. coverage of the Vietnam conflict social norms around E-mail, which is

brought of Americans it into each the homes night, of and millions had not the same as meeting someone in a person, or talking on the telephone and

profound affect on public opinion, identifying ourselves. Consequently, Tlvon alseons publiortinien, the result of these computer exchanges Television also brings sporting events, are less predictable, but they can be Technology has been changing how talk shows, educational programs,we recognize potential

we communicate. Consider that more cultural events, movies, and diverse emat the retnie cantal than two billion times every day, peo- programs into our homes. We can plans to deal with them.

pIe pick up a telephone at work or at view current movies and special prohome and make calls. If we were to grams with video cassette recorders Shy people usually benefit from

sample calls randomly, we would hear (VCR); further, the video camera modern-day technologies, which help

about people's lives in many allows us to shoot home movies and communicate without embarrassment.

languages. In the future, there will be local events and play them back imme- No one is looking when you transmit

few human operators to hear those diately. Cable television (via satellites) a message, and you do not have the

voices on the line; conversation will be brings us a variety of programming. self-conscious feeling you may extransformed by computers into bits of No other communication medium has perience when someone is present.

numbers pulsing through wires and made the world a smaller place or had Technology sometimes promotes

bouncing off satellites, a more profound impact on our lives, deeper relationships between people,

The dividing line between tele- Facsimile Machine who may "meet" each other via using

a current technology and later, phones and computers is disappearing The FAX machine, using telephone meeting face-to-face. In such cases,

and the two instruments will soon lines, permits transmission of docu- technology stimulates human contact

become one. When the telephone of mented information over long rather than reducing it.

the future is also a computer, it will be distances in a short time. This imas programmable as any state-of-the- proves the ability to make decisions Communication through technology

art personal computer. If our quickly. This technology is used to a democratizing effect. In a face-totelephone is not used as our personal market goods and services, face meeting, one person may

computer, then our personal computer monopolize the discussion, another will probably serve as our telephone. Teleconferencing and may tend to compete, and others may

According to a Stanford University Videoconferencing take minor roles. On a computer, parcomputer scientist, "By the turn of the Conferences and meetings are con- ticipation tends to level out. Particicentury, there will be telephones ducted by integrating use of telephone, pants talk about the same amount, and

smarter than the people using them." television and satellite technologies' tend to be less conscious of status,

Benefits can be measured by time and having a feeling of being protected by

Radio dollars saved. Conferences and anonymity.

The radio remains a significant com- meetings are held without attendees Using technology forces us to

munication tool. It is a popular device leaving office environments. This organize our messages. We do not

among music lovers of all ages. It also translates into travel savings and, place a telephone call without a reason

informs us of current events and subsequently, into productivity say- and, therefore, give serious thought to

weather conditions. Radio talk-shows ings; i.e., travel time saved can be ap- what we are going to ask and respond

provide an opportunity to express our plied/used to perform other tasks. (,e ACKER/AINSLEY, pape 47)

Program Manager 15 May-June 1990
~ 1 Z

n 1989, the Air Force Systems Command awarded or According to MIL-HDBK-245B, Preparation of Statement

administered 1,566 definitive contracts valued at $7.88 of Work:

billion with 957 different contractors. Central to these contracts is a crucial document known as the Statement of Work The SOW is the document by which all

(SOW). We have found, by surveying numerous Air Force nonspecification requirements for contractor efprogram managers, that there is widespread confusion, forts must be established and defined either

misunderstanding, and misconceptions regarding SOW directly or with the use of specifically cited

preparation. In fact, many program managers believe they documents .... The SOW establishes nonspecifican prepare a SOW in what ever manner they see fit. In cation tasks and identifies the work effort to be

short, our survey indicates that SOWs are not of the qual- performed expressed as minimal needs .... The

ity they should be. This article will describe the purpose of SOW defines those work tasks that cannot be

a SOW, the history of SOW preparation guidance, the contained in a specification and must never be

mechanics and basic content of our SOW survey, the inter- included in the CDRL (contract data requirerelationship of the SOW to the solicitation, and the SOW ments list) or DID (data item description).

review process. Reference will be made, throughout, to

significant results from the surveyed population as a whole,

as well as to individual respondent comments. The SOW, a legally binding document, must capture all

necessary management functions that will support the govPurpose of the SOW ernment decision process and ultimately leads to delivery

of a product or service satisfying mission requirements.

The Federal Acquisition Regulation mandates the re- Likewise, the SOW can identify resources the government

quirements for work statements as follows: will provide to industry in order for the contractor(s) to meet

government requirements successfully.

When private commercial sources are available

and a cost comparison is required, the Government's functional managers responsible for the History of SOW Guidance and Policy

comparison or another group shall prepare a To understand how a SOW is developed in today's encomprehensive, performance-oriented work vironment, you should have some familiarity with the

statement. The work statement must accurately history of SOW preparation guidance. In 1972, AFSCP

reflect the actual Government requirement, stat- 800-6, SOW Preparation Guide was released and then later

ing adequately "what" is to be done without rescinded in 1976 because it did not require a SOW format

describing "how" it is to be done; include per- in accordance with the work breakdown structure (WBS)

formance standards that can be used to ensure guidelines of MIL-STD-881A. The AFSCP 800-6 required

a comparable level of performance for both a six-part SOW which contained no applicable documents

Government and contractor and a common basis section. In 1975, the Laboratory Program Manager's Guide,

for evaluation; and be reviewed by the contract- Parts I and II, SOW Preparation was published. Although

ing officer to ensure that it is adequate and ap- a nice attempt to document lessons learned in a laboratory

propriate to serve as a basis for solicitation and setting, it was rescinded in 1976 for the same reasons as

award. AFSCP 800-6.

Captin Adler is an Assismnt P eisvor ofSyswm Manapjment, Mr. Andrews is an Assistm Proffssor of Acquisition Logistics,

School of Systems and Logisis, Air Force Institute of Technoloy, School of Systms and Logistics, Air Force Institute of Technolo,

Wright-Pattuon Air Forre Base, Ohio. He is Courne Director of Wrught-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. He is Course Director of

AFIT's Introductory Acquisition Managrment Coune. AFIT's Acquisition Logistcs Cosne.

Program Manager 16 May-June 1990
OR SOURCE OF WOE? R~dA. Andmn , CPL

In August 1978, the Navy developed is under revision and soon will be in on each respondent, to weight their

MIL-HDBK-245A, Preparation of WBS format which should make it a relative SOW experience levels, to exStatement of Work, which advocated more useful management tool. plorv their primary SOW development

a three-part SOW and supported a Current Air Force SOW preparation techniques, and to categorize common

SOW format and content consistent policy is contained in AFSCR800-6, SOW preparation problems and recwith the MIL-STD-881 WBS. Also in Statement of Work, dated April 1986. ommended solutions. The range of

1978, the Office of the Secretary of The AFSCR 800-6 invokes MIL- respondent demographic data covered

Defense issued a letter to all Services HDBK-245B, for SOW format and almost all paygrades, locations within

directing the use of MIL-HDBK-245A content, and AFR 310-1, Management the Air Force, and levels of experience.

for SOW preparation. In 1983, the Air of Contractor Data, for data acquisi- The average survey respondent was a

Force attempted to provide more clar- tion and management. The AFSCR captain with a technical background

ification of the process by drafting 800-6 requires using CGADS, or a who worked in or for a SPO. SignifiAFSCR 800-XX, The Statement of CGADS-like system, for initial SOW cant to our survey was the fact that

Work. Though never officially re- development. By AFSCR 800-6 man- nearly 70 percent of those responding

leased, this document required a three- dating use of MIL-HDBK-245B, SOWs had been responsible for preparing

part SOW format, which included a are now prepared using a three-part more than 3 SOWs in their careers. Of

compliance document section rather format to include an applicable the 2,264 surveyed, 1,038 responses

than an applicable documents section, documents section, and are compati- were received for a 45.8 percent return

was incompatible with WBS format, ble with the WBS. rate. We consider this phenomenal

and contradicted the government's response to be an indicator of the concontract performance measurement re- When program offices continually sensus of concern about SOW develquirements. If you're still using one of refer to these outdated documents for opment. These 1,038 responses inthese outdated documents to support SOW guidance, it creates problems. cluded more than 650 handwritten

SOW development, our advice is For instance, by saturating industry comments covering the full gamut of

simple-tear them up and throw them with different SOW formats, we end concerns on the SOW process.

away. up paying contractors to decipher

Compounding what we really mean. When SOWs are Identification of Symptoms the problem was the not prepared in accordance with MIL- A etoeorsre osse

Electronic Systems Division's concur- STD-881A, they are inconsistent with As mentioned, our survey consisted

rent development of an AFSCR follo-onA thyicon sistprfrmne with of 65 questions on respondent demo800-XXbsede opue o au- follow-on contract performance mea- graphics, level of SOW preparation exGenran thoring system te Acunitown known Ds as omnters Computer surements trol Systems such Criteria as Cost/Schedule (C/SCSC). Con- Theperience, prove the and process. recommendations In this segment, to im- we

Generated Acquisition Document Sys- government should be providing all want the prounwork segientfytem (CGADS). Basically, CGADS contractual documents in the same for- want to set groundwork by identifyasks a series of self-paced program mat and let weapon system uniq ing selected survey questions relevant

specific questions which results in the mtadltwposyemuiue to problems associated with SOW decreation of a draft SOW outline. The program management and technical velopment. We'll explore specific outline highlights data items, military requirements be the difference. This responses and possible trends and pro- otnehis andpecifatios, atioty one face, or format, to industry makes vide our subjective interpretation. standards and specifications, action organizational sense, especially for vd u u etv nepeain

messages, and other warnings based on those who have to interpret govern- To understand the significance of

your responses. Because CGADS was n ement rquests for proposals. this problem, we should point out that

based on AFSCR 800-X-X, it has been rwhen asked how many of respondents in the wrong format since its inception had ever been involved in SOW prepand is contradictory to some current SOW Survey Results aration, 729 (71 percent) of the 1,025

SOW preparation requirements. For In 1988-89, 2,264 Air Force Systems respondents indicated a varying degree

whatever reason, CGADS has not Command program managers, in Air of experience. Of those, 19 percent

been recognized as a significant aid in Force Specialty Codes of 26XX through gained experience exclusively in major

SOW development. Over 74 percent of 28XX, were sent a 65-question survey programs, 52 percent in non-major

1,025 responses neither agreed nor on SOW preparation. The survey was programs and the remaining 29 percent

disagreed on its benefits. The CGADS structured to obtain demographic data in both type programs.

Program Manager 17 May-June 1990
Recognizing Symptoms

Part IV of the survey asked respondents to rate their degree of concern

(none, minor, major, and overwhelming) on a series of 10 SOW preparation

FIGUTRE 1. TrE SOW IS ONE OF 7HE MOST problems. These included (1) grammar

IlPORTANT DOCUMEIN1S PREPARED BY THE SPO and syntax, (2) defining data requirements, (3) developing tasking statements, (4) dealing with time conN 700 straints, (5) related program exU -- perience, (6) word processing capabil- * 60 ity, (7) finding ambiguities and

E SO .. .. ... .. loopholes, (8) group communication

R skills, (9) interpreting government

R 400 . . . .. .. ... .. .. guidelines and, (10) integrating pro300 gram requirements. Of these areas,

S 3o0 defining data requirements, develop- 0 2ment of task statements, and in- o 200

N tegrating program requirements reS 100 ceived the highest ratings for "major E concern, 'followed closely by dealing

S 0 with time constraints, finding ambiguSTRONGLY MODERATELY NEUTRAL MODERATELY STRONGLY ities and loopholes, and interpreting AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE government guidelines. RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES In addition, respondents were asked

to provide written comments on any

issue they felt was significant to SOW

development. As a consequence of

survey responses, our interpretation of

those responses, and to some extent

our own experience in SOW prepara- FIGURE 2. SOW DEVELOPMENT IS ONE OF THE tion, we have summarized results into

MOST DIFFICULT TASKS THE SPO PERFORMS four basic findings.

Finding #1. There appears to be two

-.-. fundamental but diverse aspects

N -00 associated with the actual writing of a U SOW. One, and in reality probably

400 the most crucial, is the identification

E and thorough description of technical

R 300---........... and managerial taskings the contracR tor is expected to perform. The other

8 200 " area is proper SOW formatting, which

includes content. In this application,

0o .content refers to what should and

N 100 should not be in the SOW. As exK *amples, performance requirements

9 0 "belong in the specification; delivery

STRONGLY MODERATELY NEUTRAL MODERATELY STRONGLY schedules belong in Section B of the

AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE contract; and data are requested in the

RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES contract data requirements list

(CDRL). One respondent's comment

summarized this point most

effectively.

Program Manager 18 May-June 1990
I have prepared SOWs for two

product divisions. I was surprised and frustrated to find each

division prepares SOWs differently, essentially invalidating

my previous experience. Pro- FIGURE 3. CONTRACTORS W BE ABL T

gram documentation and acqui- FIND LOOPHOLES IN TBE SOW CONTENT

sition procedures must be standardized throughout AFSC if the 500

acquisition process is to be made N

optimally efficient. U

B 400

E

Finding #2. There are perceptions R

made by SOW developers influencing 300 - -

the way they prepare a SOW. The R

manner in which an individual would S200 ---

attack the performance of a complex P

task is influenced by their perception 0

of importance of the task; difficulty of N 100

the task; their experience in perform- E

ing similar tasks; and thoroughness 0

and usability of available guidelines. STRONGLY MODERATELY NEUTRAL MODERATELY STRONGLY

Several survey questions revealed AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE

respondents' perceptions on matters RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES

relevant to SOW development. Figure

1 clearly shows they consider the SOW

as one of the most important

documents prepared by the program

office, while Figure 2 supports the contention that the SOW development

process is one of the most difficult

tasks performed. Though a large FIGURE 4. THE AIR FORCE HAS SPECIFC AND

percentage of those surveyed indicated ACCURATE SOW DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AVAILABLE

some degree of SOW preparation experience, there is a strong feeling, as 400

can be seen in Figure 3, that contrac- N

tors will always be able to find U

loopholes in SOW requirements. This 0 3

may be one of the reasons that E

respondents weren't quite as con- R

vinced, as depicted in Figure 4, that the R 200

current SOW preparation guidance is E

as specific and adequate as they think S

it should be. When specifically asked o 100

about the existing guidance docu- N

ments, AFSCR 800-6, statement of '

work and MIL-HDBK-245B, prepara- 0 o

tion of statement of work, the largest STRONGLY MODERATELY NEUTRAL MODERATELY STRONGLY

percentages by far (65 percent and 61 AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE

percent, respectively) neither agreed RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES

nor disagreed (neutral) that these

documents were valuable aids in

developing a SOW.

Program Manager 19 May-June 1990
An interesting result surfaced when implying this tactic is improper. Our technical support contractor

survey takers were asked to provide However, it does appear that an at- develops virtually all SOWs for

opinions on the statement, "Most pro- titude of "It is simpler to review and major programs. Government

gram SOWs are written in clear, con- comment on a document than it is to personnel have little opportunity

cise and unambiguous language." Of write it" is becoming more to change or alter SOWs and

the 1,033 responses, 25 percent neither commonplace. project officers generally have

agreed nor disagreed, 48 percent When contractors prepare SOWs, very little influence within the

moderately disagreed and 13 percent we must be sensitive to the fact their organization. Consequently,

strongly disagreed (see Figure 5). This inputs may reflect their way of want- SOWs (as well as specs) are very

response is significant when you realize ing to do business which may not often poorly structured, poorly

only 14 percent of respondents had any necessarily be in the best interest of the written, and in general serve only

positive convictions that our SOWs government. We may be going as square fillers in the contractual

are clear, concise and unambiguous; through a metamorphosis from process.

yet 71 percent were experienced in "doers" to "reviewers." This is not our Finding #3. Requirements identificaSOW development. Could this mean isolated opinion. Several similar com- tion, development guidelines and

that a large group of experienced SOW ments were received in the survey education/training are "direct conpreparers do not put much faith in responses. tributing factors" affecting SOW

their ability to write a SOW7" The biggest obstacle I see in development. By our definition, a

When asked to respond to "The defining statements of work is d~rect contributing factor is one that

SOW should be prepared solely by the technical inexperience of the formally exists in policy, procedure or

government personnel" and "Technical government personnel. We are practice; is recognized as a needed

support contractors and prime con- forced to rely on contractors to component of the development protractors are good sources of informa- provide draft SOWs because no cess; and because of misapplication or

tion but should not provide draft one in the Air Force is technically non-application has a detrimental afSOWs for government uses" the sharp enough to fully understand fect on SOW development. "moderately disagree" choice received the problem and the solution. It's Requirements Identification

the largest response percentage (see an old story, and I don't see a For SOW development, three difFigure 6). This may mean that because solution as long as we are conSOW preparation guidance tends to be tracting every small task that ferent but integrated sets of reperceived as inadequate, there may be comes along instead of doing quirements must be considered. These

a growing trend toward more contrac- work in-house and developing are (1) user operational requirements,

tor development of SOWs. We are not the experienced personnel. (2) regulatory requirements, and (3)

functional area requirements.

User Operational Requirements

Nearly all acquisition programs

FIGURE 5. SOW$ ARE WR1ITEN IN CLEAR, begin with the operational command

CONCTISE AND UNAMBIGUOUS LANGUAGE identifying their inability to perform

any or all parts of a given mission. The

deficiency customarily takes the form

N oo of a statement of operational need

U (SON) as described in AFR 57-1.

V 500 Operational Needs, Requirements ana

E Concepts. The SON, in part, provides

R 400 ... the implementing command preR liminary requirements to support R 300 ... . research, development, test and

S evaluation planning and procurement P 200 activities. Once an acquisition pro0 

ga N gram starts, the operating command

S 100 typically prepares a system operational

E ' requirements document (SORO) and s 0 requirements correlation matrix

STRONGLY MODERATELY NEUTRAL MODERATELY STRONGLY (RCM), also covered in AFR 57-1. The

AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE SORD is the planning document that

RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES amplifies and refines the SON requirements in a more comprehensive and

quantitative manner. The RCM, a

SORD attachment, documents and

tracks the formulation of and changes

to user requirements as the program moves through the acquisition process.

Program Manager 20 May-June 1990
The depot support requirements document, prepared by AFLC, is a standalone document whose purpose is to

describe AFLC plans and requirements

for providing depot maintenance and

material support to the system. FIGURE 6. GOVERNMENT VS CONTRACTOR

What's a SON, SORD, RCM and SOW PREPARATION

DSRD got to do with SOW preparation7 Well, it's simple. All these user

requirements, identified in the early N 800

U phases of the acquisition cycle, become M 700

the basis for much of the effort that s

will be contained in the SOW. Without E S0

a comprehensive and realistic set of in- R 500

itial requirements, it becomes difficult R

to prepare and negotiate a contract E 400

capable of satisfying user needs. s

0 Regulatory Requirements N 200

S Within the federal acquisition E 100

regulation (FAR), Department of S Defense regulations, and Air Force 0

STRONGLY MODERATELY NEUTRAL MODERATELY STRONGLY regulations, there are certain re- AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE

quirements whose application in the SOW is not left to the discretion of the l

SOWpisro t lft to dis exe retin s oTHE GOVERNMENT SHOULD CONTRACTORS SHOULD NOT PROVIDE quirements for cost reporting; FAR SOLELY PREPARE THE SOW DRAFT SOWS TO THE GOVERNMENT

mandated procedures for acquiring

proprietary data; and Air Force

specific, but tailorable, SOW language

for technical order development and

acquisition (TMCR 86-01). Because order for Mil-E-5400 was re- preparing SOWs "right" we often

these requirements are scattered turned by the pubs center as create undesirable task partitionthroughout a deluge of government "item not identifiable." ing. For example, we really want

documents, chances increase that The whole process of SOW develop- the contractor's systems engineer

something may slip through the crack. ment begins with realistic require- to consider supportability and

Functional Area Requirements ments. Access to complete and realistic producibility as an integral part Thecomon Ar a c irnt S requirements are not the end-all to our of systems design, but by calling

The common approach in SOW SOW problems, but it is a beginning, out those areas as large separate

preparation is to identify and assign tasks, we virtually assure that

functional experts to draft the ap- SOW Development Guidelines separate contractor teams will be

plicable SOW requirements in their established.

area of expertise. Each expert identifies Availability of SOW development In all good conscience, we must

the unique taskings of the discipline guidelines received more than a fair agree in part to this comment. The

and tailors these requirements to the share of attention in the survey re- MIL-STD-881A has been around a

specific phase of the acquisition pro- sponses. This particular subject, long time. We have been hearing for

cess. One respondent, after having though addressed previously, warrants a few ears that a revision to the WBS

tried to accomplish this task, stated additional attention because of several structyears e in tortely,

frustration quite frankly. comments. One response particularly except for some preliminary drafts, not

I have wasted untold hours in an caught our attention. mlich else has surfaced.

inadequate technical reference Shoehorning every SOW into the Standardization plays a key part in the

library trying to locate the mil- MIL-STD-881A WBS categories contracting process. The SOWs must

specs/mil-stds. There appears to is counterproductive-it pro- have certain rules for what they can

be no logic to the numbering motes SOW preparation as a rote and cannot contain and what their forsystem. I can't thread my way "cut-and-paste" exercise with too mat should be. The MIL-HDBK-245B,

through the index (which is little creativity. As a result, un- though needing some updating, is an

several microfiche long). Even if necessarily rigid task procedures excellent document for the format reI look through the index, titles tend to be called out and too quirements for a SOW. An improved

rarely reflect true content. I even much data is asked for. Logically WBS is needed to support government

tried ordering some pubs on the conceived tasks often address management and tracking of contracrecommendation of others. My multiple WBS categories. By tor performance.

Program Manager 21 May-June 1990
-After preparing a SOW in accorFIGUR.B 7. MOST GOVERNMENT ACQUISiTION dance with MIL-HDBK-245B and havMANAGERS HAVE THE NECESSARY EXPERIENCE ing it bounce at the contract manageAND TRAIrNING TO PR.EPAR.E TI SOW ment division, we found out that their

contracting officers did not know it exI isted (MIL-HDBK-245B)....

U -Don" let legal get hold of SOW

* 4 - (they dilute your technical description E 

to mush). E

R- The tone of these comments leads us

0 .to believe that these kind of actions E cause as much frustration to a SOW .... 2 developer as do the factors mentioned

0 earlier. These comments are really adN10 dressing management, leadership,

E human and organizational behavior, S 0and communications skills. We think

0 these responses are suggesting an in- STRONGLY MODERATELY NEUTRAL MOOERATELY STRONGLY these respon to suggesip and

AGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE creased attention to leadership and

RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES managerial skills.

SOW and Other

Education and Training Finding #4. Indirect contributing fac- Solicitation Documents

Education and training to support tors to relate affecting to managerial SOW development responsibilities. tend The SOW was never intended to be

SOW development will be treated as An ret ontriutingpfatoriistoe a stand-alone document. One of the a separate and detailed segment of a An indirect contributing factor is one more critical functions a SOW persubsequent article. However, we have that has no formal policy governing its forms is that of integration. The SOW,

chosen to ch highlight s i n hi t h inputs n us regarding rg ri g accomplishment; recognized as a needed it was component not greatly of and an its it associated aso aed work w r breakdown b e k o n education/training because manyreonzdaaneedcm nntf

respondents felt it was a major part of the development process, but because structure, is the primary instrument

the problem. When asked if acquisition of misapplication or non-application it around which contractual requireahend a i it e n has been identified as having a ments and contractor costs are based.

managers have the necessary detrimental effect on SOW develop- This segment of the article will briefly

SOWs, of the,031responses, 65per ment. These are the pet peeves of address the interrelationship of the

cent "odeathel t1 ston 65 gly" respondents-situations that have SOW to other selected parts of the Redisagreed with the statement (see been a source of irritation. Though quest for Proposal (see Figure 8).

Figure 

were provided, 

7). Though 

one 

many comments many examples were given, only the SOW and Contract Line Items seemed to capture most prevalent responses are men- atweast proi one se ther custr , tioned. We feel respondents' comments For contract management and cost- at least a portion of their frustration. speak for themselves and require no tracking purposes, supplies and serWe have a large "corporate explanation. vices are identified and charged against

memory" that seems to get little contract line items located in Part I,

education on how SOWs should -The newest lieutenant gets to do the Section B, of the contract. Because

be written. This is a crime. This next SOW. (AF rule #212). each supply or service has its separate

corporate memory needs to be -Coordination of draft SOWs is a form (usually Standard Form 36), they

forced into these courses. At the problem. Most offices think: [This is are sequentially numbered and are re- very least, everyone involved in a draft and not important. Let's wait ferred to as CLINs (contract line item

SOW preparation should have a for the real thing before we coordinate numbers). The CLIN types and content

refresher course in how SOWs or comment. This means the coordi- are usually recommended by various

should be written. There needs to nation of the final SOW will be functional experts involved in SOW

be more direct communications delayed. development. The CLINs are coor- with the users to determine that dinated by the program manager ard

the proper requirements are iden- -Lesser experienced bosses not believ- approved by the contracting officer.

tified. We must realize that those ing that you know what you're doing. Tasks performed in accordance with

accountable for SOW prepara- -All too often, people will copy a SOW requirements must be charged

tion consider education and SOW that worked rather than prepare against one of the CLINs in Section B.

training of paramount impor- a new SOW based on program objec- For this reason, it is necessary that all

tance. Whether the inadequacies tives. Some rely on contractors to SOW taskings are accounted for in one of training are perceived or real, prepare a draft, but do not analyze of the CLINs. This is generally verified

the issue must be accepted as a what has been left out .... A good SOW during the source-selection process by

direct contributing factor to the will not save bad management, but a requiring proposing contractor(s) to

self-proclaimed shortcomings of poor SOW will cause problems in provide a SOW to CLIN cross-reference

SOW preparation. execution, matrix.

Program Manager 22 May-June 1990
SOW and Specification

The system specification, Part I, Sec- FIGTR 8. UNI FRM CONAf CTFORPMAT

tion C, is that document identifying ,*.., ,

the performance and supportability re- Mrv

quirements for the system under

development. The SOW, with few exceptions, is not intended to identify I,

systems performance requirements

(i.e., speed, accuracy, operating fre- ,

quencies,etc.) or supportability requirements (i.e., reliability or maintainability quantitative requirements,

maintenance concept, etc.). However,

the SOW is supposed to task the contractor to perform those activities, be

they technical or management, that

support the attainment of the require- . ..,..

ments described in the specification. It

is, therefore, essential that the SOW

contain only necessary activities .

geared to satisfy directly or indirectly -

the specification.

SOW and Supplies/Services

Inspection, Acceptance, Delivery

and Performance T

The inspection and acceptance criteria for supplies and/or services is

located in Part 1, Section E, of the

solicitation. The inspection and acceptance section identifies by CLIN the -"I' 7 .717

location and procedures to be employed for the inspection and eventual

acceptance of a supply or service. A tify by CLIN, as was done in Section describes the contractor's responsibility

supply, for example, can be inspected E, the location and date of the supply for the requisitioning, transportation,

for compliance with government re- delivery or service performance. The storage, accountability, and maintequirements at the contractor's facility, same fundamental relationship exists nance of the GFE items provided. Bea government facility, or another loca- between the SOW and Section F as it cause many special provisions of Section (i.e., subcontractor's plant). The was for Section E. tion H have their basis in SOW relocation of acceptance can, and in quirements. there must be complete

many cases is, different than the place agreement between the SOW and these

of inspection and must be so specified. SOW and Special special contract requirements.

Many tasks in the SOW will result in Contract Requirements

delivery of a supply (i.e., engineering In the development of your SOW re- S and List of Documents,

drawings, technical orders, support quirements, you may feel it necessaryAttachments

equipment, etc.) or performance of a to provide the contractor with addi- The List of documents, exhibits and

service (i.e., interim contractor sup- tional information on what, how, other attachments, Part II, Section J,

port, contractor engineering technical when, where, etc., that affect his in some respects, is a catchall section

services, etc.). It is therefore necessary responsibility, liability, and perfor- of the contract. Customarily, the conto ensure that each SOW task deliver- mance of certain tasks. Part 1, Section tract data requirements list (CDRL)

ing a supply or service has an inspec- H, special contract requirements, and, though not in accordance with the

tion and acceptance criteria reflected would likely be the place for that ex- FAR, the system specification and

in Section E. planation. Since there are innumerable SOW are commonly found here.

Delivery and performance criteria, options that can be included in this sec- Other attachments usually include

Part I, Section F, are similar in applica- tion, a single example must suffice. As SOW attachments for things like intion to the inspection and acceptance a contract requirement, the contractor terim contractor support, provisioncriteria just described. The difference is to integrate government furnished ing, technical order development; waris that when a supply and/or a service equipment (GFE) into their system ranty terms and conditions; lists of

is to be provided, we must also iden- design. You may even identify the equipment exhibits, etc. It fundamentify where and when the supply must exact GFE items in the system specifi- tally holds true that whatever appears

be delivered or the service must be per- cation. You would then most likely in this section is usually directly related

formed. Section F will therefore iden- place a provision in Section H that to a SOW requirement.

Program Manager 23 May-June 1990
Just a few more words about the groups and committees outside the engineering is that quite often the

CDRL. Data are a by-product of work. SPO environment whose activities government engineers are so deThe work effort that generates data is could have a significant impact on tached from the technical details

most frequently tasked in the SOW. SOW content. Of these, the most in- of the work that questions about

The DD Form 1423, the data item fluential are the acquisition strategy the technical scope and con- order form, contains a cross reference panel, solicitation review board and straints are unanswerable.

to the SOW paragraph that created the data requirements review board. This comment highlights the interwork effort. Likewise, the SOW task that generates the data must contain a Acquisition Strategy Panels (ASP) relationship business approach, between budgetary a program's and

parenthetical reference to the data item According to AFSCR 800-53, Ac- schedule constraints, and their overall

description (DID) number or the quisition Strategy Panels, the overall technical approach. Since the SOW is

CDRL sequence number immediately objective of an ASP is to: based on SPO and government techfollowing Data the SOW task statement. Ensure that a systematic and nical and business approaches, pro- are derived from work, not the Esr htasseai n other way around. Several problems disciplined approach has been gram managers have the duty of in- are eliminated when there is correla- developed to meet the user's tegrating all requirements in the SOW

tion between SOW tasks and CDRL needs within resource constraints and specification. Our survey results

data requirements. and that the approach is consis- indicated that this is a major concern tent with the Program Manage- for most program managers and is one

SOW and Instructions, Conditions ment Directive (PMD). This ob- of the most important SOW skills a And Notices to Offeror jective is achieved by conducting program manager must possess. a corporate review of the pro- Solicitation Review Boards (SRB

This section, also known as the In- posed program to verify that the

structions to Offerer (ITO), is located technical approach is effective While the ASP is the front-end, bigin Part IV, Section L. It is in this sec- and the business approach fully picture review of the solicitation

tion of the solicitation where we iden- supports it. review process, the SRB serves as the

tify exactly what we want in the con- nuts-and-bolts review preceding retractor's proposal response to the RFP. Except for basic research and ex- lease of the RFP to industry. The

The greatest impact of this section is ploratory development, ASPs are re- AFSCR 70-7, solicitation review

on the content of the government pre- quired on all AFSC programs. The board, describes the SRB as being

pared source-selection plan. The ASPs have replaced business strategy required to:

source-selection plan identifies and panels and include reviews by all funcdescribes each of the areas, items, fac tional disciplines which impact the Review a solicitation to make

dris suacoa teareads te, con- SPO's acquisition strategy. The sure it gives a sound basis for

tors, subfactors and standards the primary purpose of the ASP is to serve contracting and includes desired

tractor's bid will be evaluated against, as a sanity check early in the solicita- program objectives; conforms to It makes no sense to write an evalua- a aiycekeryi h oiia

tion standard in the source-selection tion preparation process, before existing regulations and laws; implan if the contractor is not required development of the RFP is too far plements AFSC acquisition pol- to p-ovide information related to that along. The panels normally consist of icy; outlines in clear and concise

standard. It isequally counterproduc- AFSC's top functional experts and terms what the Government intive for the ITO to require the contrac representatives from operating com- tends to buy; and contains only tor to provide information where there mands and HQ USAF. Issues ad- essential requirements. is no standard to evaluate the informa- dressed mainly concern the program's The SRB, formerly the solicitation tion against. What's this got to do with background and current direction, review panel, has been given an ex- the SOW? Everything. The information technical approach, and business panded role in the solicitation acquisi- you require the contractor to provide strategy. In fact, AFSCR 800-53 in- tion process as a result of the latest per the ITO is almost exclusively based cludes an extensive suggested subject regulatory revision. One of the key

on tasks in the SOW and specification functions of the SRB is to review and

content. You should be able to read One survey respondent replied recommend concurrence and incoryour ITO or source-selection evalua- regarding government technical and poration, or non-concurrence, on all

tion standards and be able to identify business approaches. industry comments made to a prothe more significant SOW and specifi- The fundamental problem (in grams draft RFP. As one respondent

cation requirements. preparing SOWs) is to define put it:

what work needs to be done. Remember that it costs the

SOW Review Process This question has several com- government to have a contractor

The SOW is not a stand-alone docu- ponents: What work is techni- provide a proposal in response to

ment or is it the private domain of the cally feasible within the bud- a SOW. As a government repreprogram office. Apart from the fact getary constraints and time con- sentative, you must insure that

that 92 percent of respondents ex- straints? For example, we could the contractor is properly adperienced in SOW preparation belitve probably orbit the Empire State dressing Air Force needs.

that all functional managers need to Building in outer space if we Another more subtle yet realistic

review the SOW for completeness and spend enough money and time. remark was made by another

conciseness, there are still various The problem with Air Force respondent:

Program Manager 24 May-June 1990
A major problem is wanting to all programs with potential costs

put something in the SOW that greater than $5 million. The DRRB, (Gntinuedfrim page 12)

the contractor will not accept; chaired by the program manager or the

i.e., either change or remove the SPO's data manager, reviews all data

SOW tasks or, worst case, he requirements for consistency with The Acquisition Decision Memoranwill not bid on the work. other sections of the solicitation. The dum (ADM) was released October 11,

This brings us back to our basic DRRB is tasked to ensure that the 1989, four weeks after the DAB. Acquestion: How does this affect our SOW and CDRL are properly cross- cording to individuals that attended

business approach and acquisition referenced and that task requirements the DAB, this ADM reflected the

strategy? These are not easy questions are in the SOW and data preparation general discussions during the DAB

to answer, as there really is no absolute instructions are in the CDRL. Finally, but included specifics not addressed at

right or wrong answer. Our overriding according to regulatory guidance, the DAB. Although the requirement

objective must be to determine what namely AFSCR 800-6 implementation for criteria for future buys was brought

will meet the government's minimum of MIL-HDBK-245B, the DRRB must up at the DAB, specifics were not adneeds. ensure that each SOW reviewed con- dressed and, consequently, the ADM

forms to the policy, guidance and pro- attachment includes direction on issues

The SOW is typically one of the last cedures contained in MIL-HDBK-245B. not discussed at the DAB. The comdocuments reviewed at the SRB parative timeliness and adherence to

because it integrates many of the other As mentioned, defining data re- DAB discussions shows an improvedocuments reviewed. The SOW in- quirements was selected as the number ment over past ADMs, although an

yokes standards and specification(s), it one problem in SOW preparation. Un- earlier release time would be

implements the acquisition strategy fortunately, DRRBs are not stan- desirabk,

and other SPO plans, and it identifies dardized among commands, product

where data are generated on the con- divisions, or even between program of- My best advice is to talk to persontract. In relation to the ASP, the SRB fices. A common DRRB format and nel that worked the most recert DAB

is typically a lower-level review reflect- process, with expanded SOW review to find out how it really works and

ing the amount of effort needed to authority, needs to be implemented what are the latest OSD "hot issues."

evaluate and process the solicitation before any systematic SOW prepara- The good news is that this program

package. One survey respondent tion efficiencies can be realized, was given the go-ahead for 3 years of

Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) believed that we can do a better job of Summary contingent on meeting certain criteria.

using Air Force corporate memory: I thirk ti,,s success was not due to the

The SOW is the nucleus of our ac- issues being resolved early (they

A special team, well-trained in quisition process but, unfortunatev in wer' but res eary (the

SOW writing should review all far too many cases, it is also th genesis weren't) but was due, in part, to the

SOWs prior to release and dur- of program problems. The SOW sur- ceibility we had garnered by working their formation to help keep vy r ing the issues so openly, and in part to itheircororato meory herpkee vey results just described made it clrar OSO';, , rong desire for this program.

the "corporate memory" from that the problems associated with

just updating old, poorly written SOW development are multifaceted My assessment is that the bureauSOWs. and equally frustrating to managers cracy inhibits early resolution of issues

and functional experts at all levels, and the DAB process is more akin to

The Aeronautical Systems Division More than 61 percent of the program a "murder board" than to an oversight

(ASD), Wright-Patterson AFB, has in- manager responses think we, the and decision process, which is not necitiated an ongoing SOW review pro- government, do a lousy job of prepar- essarily bad if the product is a better

cess so that future solicitation packages ing SOWs in clear, concise, and unam- decision. However, supporting this

will be better integrated with the ASD biguous language. Poor quality SOWs process is costly, in terms of time,

corporate philosophy. Between the can't be blamed solely on the educa- money, and manpower and we need to

times that the ASP and the SRB are tional process, or the government streamline the process down to the

conducted, ASD forms acquisition guidelines, or individual perception. minumum requirements.

review teams (ARTs) to review the It's a mixture of all. Therefore, you

draft RFP and other solicitation must recognize which symptoms are

documents. The ARTs comprise prevalent in your organization and

senior, experienced program man- take steps to eliminate them. To im- Captain Clemens is a Tactical Mission

agers, typically in the grades 0-6 or prove our SOW quality and effec- Action Offier at Headquarters Air Force

GS-15. Their intent is to have as solid tiveness, we must develop acquisition Systems Command, Andrews Air Force

a solicitation package as possible cadres capable of communicating Base. She is a graduate of PMC 88-I

before release to industry through clearly and efficiently. The next and DSMC.

upper-management review, final article on the SOW process will

address the "how to" of SOW develop- Data Requirements ment and identification of educational

Review Board (DRRB) and training resources available to aid

The DRRB function and process, ir, SOW preparation.

described in AFR 310-1, Management

of Contractor Data, is mandatory for

Program Manager 25 May-June 1990
PROGRAM

MANAGERS

WITH

Dr. Owen C. Gadeken Mr. Bernard J. Cullen Ms. Nora F. Huvelle

arlier Program Manager articles outlined the pelling "sense of ownership" in wanting to be involved in

]E methodology' and results2 of DSMC's study iden- any decision which positively or negatively affects his

tifying competencies (technical expertise, management and program:

leadership skills) possessed by effective program managers Why did I want to get involved in the treaty? in the defense acquisition process. This article provides a The reason is that it affected my system. I am more detailed view of program manager competencies. All in charge of the full system management. That

examples are drawn verbatim from transcripts of 52 pro- is my system. You better talk to me. If you won't

grain manager interviews used to develop the competency talk to me, I will kick down your door. If you model displayed in Figure 1. throw me out of your office, I will go find

Four points need to be kept in mind as you read this somebody else or I will come in your back door.

descriptive material. First, for ease of exposition, each com- I am responsible for this system. It didn't say ex- petency is discussed separately. In the study, these corn- cluding the INF treaty. It didn't say only on petencies were seldom manifested in isolation. Wednesday. This is my system.

Second, specific extracts from transcripts must be inter- Effective program managers understand events and make

preted in the light of the overall situations that frequently decisions from a broader perspective than their personal suc- ran 15-20 pages. The appropriateness and effectiveness of cess or that of their program. They consider needs and re- a particular behavior varies with the actual situation. Each quirements of their Service or of the defense system as a example included below is associated with a successful whole.

outcome. Secretary Lehman's policy (regarding industry's

Third, the examples used below should be interpreted as investment in tooling costs) didn't look so apspontaneously recalled details of past events. In some in- pealing to us, but from a Navy/DOD perspecstances the examples are not dramatic. What should be kept tive it had a lot of merit to it. It is the bigger picin mind is that in almost all instances outstanding performers ture that sometimes programs don't see. provided more examples of these behaviors than did the ef- This strong sense of ownership and mission sustains pro- fective program managers in the control group. gram managers throughout numerous frustrations,

Fourth, these competencies reflect what effective program obstacles, reversals and last-minute crises.

managers do in the current acquisition environment. Signifi- I felt frustrated. But at the time I felt like it was cant changes in acquisition system structures or policies such a good thing we were doing for the Army

could well impact the relevance of a particular competency. that it was worth all the frustration and the hard

work and whatever else we needed to do to make

Sense of Ownership/Mission it successful.

Program managers by virtue of title are the ostensible program leaders. Not all program managers, however, Dr. Gadken is Director of Educational Researh at the Defe

demonstrate the leadership their position requires. Better Syrtems Managmet olW. Mr. CuUen and Ms. Huele are program managers are far more explicit about their leader- Senior Parner and onmuhant, resctively, Cambria Consulting,

ship. One program manager, explaining his reaction to being Inc. Boston, Masachusett (rime contractor fir the Prrevam

potentially frozen out of a key meeting, exemplifies a com- Manager Competency Study).

Program Manager 26 May-June 1990
FIGURE 1. PROGRAM MANAGER COMPET!ENCY MODEL

(Numbers below do not Indicate order of Importance)

Managing the External Environment Managing for Enhanced Performance

* 1. Sense of Ownership/Mission 10. Long-term Perspective

* 2. Political Awareness 11. Focus on Excellence

* 3. Relationship Development 12. lnnovativenessinltiative

* 4. Strategic Influence 13. Optimizing

* 5. Interpersonal Assessment 14. Systematic Thinking

6. Aseveness -Proactivity

Managing the Internal Environment * 15. Action Orientation

7. Managerial Orientation .16.. Proactive Information Gathering

8. Results Orientation

9. Critical Inquiry *Denotes competencies which distinguish outstanding from efective program managers (at p < .03) based on frequency of

demonstration

Competency Definitions

1. Sense of Ownership/Mission. Seon self as 8. Results Orientation. Evaluates perfor- responsible for the program; articulates prob- mance In terms of accomplishing specific goals Iome or Issues from broader organizational or or meeting specific standards.

mission prective. 9. Critical Inquiry. Explores critca issues that

2. PON"tca Awareness. Knows who hminntial are not being explicitly addressed by others.

players are, what they want and how bost to 10. Long-term Perspective. Anticipates and work( with themi. plans for future Issues and problems.

3. RelatVonhip Developmient. Spends time 11. Focus on Excellence. Strives for the

ande sWQ$0VIIQokIowW WW ~ orsP , highest standards regadless of circumstances.

4. nflonce Sratgic Bukle oalooneand 12. lnnovatlvenesslnltlatlve. Champions and

4. nfuene.Buidscol~ton trtegc ~ pushes now ways of meeting program orheftassiafotoovrcmeobtak requirements.

and~ ~ ~ ~ obanspot Oplln*n. Mimeo de~lslons aft carefully 5. Intrporsonal Anesament. Identifies evsat advantages and disadvantges. speciic i tst, motivations, swtrgh and

wekese ofa~j 14. Ssteautic Thinking. Organizes and

6. Asedwoefe. Tale or maintainis Pool- fYW rolsmehdal.

tion dspke anilpe ressnne @ or apposal- 15. Action Orlelitatleli. Reacts to problems

tion from nfenl otites. energ@icay and1 w~h a sens of urgency.

7. Maisgrs Ortation. Get wo* dons 11001116 fcisltnGthering.Sytm 8111l~ 

wulthrog ow011611 of cowsr. We*y a Asano arW revis hInoti

Program Manager 27 May-June 1990
Political Awareness Nor is there likely to be time during fluence others in less overt ways. Even

The number of players who can a budget drill or a program review for in the most straightforward, procedurpotentially impact a program is huge. a manager to begin the process of ally constrained situations, effective

Thus, it becomes important for a pro- developing a shared and sympathetic program managers skillfully employ gram manager to determine who these understanding with key players. Rela- :ifluence strategies to help them

players are and which are the key tionships need to be already devel- achieve their objectives.

ones. oped. A program manager without his

grapevine is likely to be blind One of th? things that I think you

When you embark on a change sided. have to do as a program manain acquisition strategy, you want ger is to make those guys underto get the rest of those players I got to know the staff pretty stand your priorities. And the

who are going to get in your well. When I needed a letter from way you make them understand

way. You have to orchestrate the admiral, I worked it through your priorities is by maybe exagthat. I went around and briefed his staff. I got to be on a first gerating the amount of time that

those guys. But the first one, the name basis with the staff. They'd you spend on a particular point in

truth is that I just bypassed ask me questions from time to the monthly meetings. Monthly

everybody and went to see time; I helped them, they helped meetings were a culture shock to

Mr .-...... Once I got him on me. The point is that in the in- this contractor but the key was

board it was easy. Nobody was dustry of technology brokerage, having them. They learned it was

going to argue. the thing that counts is like going to church on Sunday.

Political awareness involves recog- networking. It's part of the religion of the pronizing perspectives and interests of gram: In the middle of every

other key players. The more effective Most program managers are respon- month, me and the boys show up

program managers are sensitive to the sible for systems that have large user for a little show-and-tell. They

impressions they make on these communities. Effective user support got used to it and the program

stakeholders. For example, this pro- frequently demands considerably more began to run smoothly. After a

gram manager demonstrates the savvy than building a system meeting tech- while, I was able to cut back on

needed to deal effectively with two nical specifications. This program those meetings.

testing offices that operated indepen- manager uses a symbolic action to

dently from the program office: demonstrate commitment to the user When confronted by entrenched opI really had to be sensitive to community. position, program managers use more

everybody's little piece of pie. We orchestrated meetings with direct means of influencing outcomes.

There was a reluctance. The op- the fleet. I spent time listening to They enlist the involvement of others

erational community tradition- their complaints and issues. As who have the authority, legitimacy,

ally doesn't want to get involved an example, to show that we expertise or political clout they lack.

with the development commu- cared about what they thought, In the following budget situation, the

nity. So you have to handle it we had initially used plastic tie program manager knew who to inwith kid gloves to make sure wraps on cables. In the Navy, we volve, at what point and why:

you're not stepping on anyone's had used metal bandits for years.

turf. Explain that you're pulling Plastic wraps do the same job, I finally recognized that I needed

them together to work on a but it doesn't look the same. One heavy hitters with more influence

Navy problem. guy said: 'You know, this just and authority than I had, so I set

doesn't look like the rest of the up a meeting with the program

ship.' I said: 'You're right.' We executive office, the head of proRelationship Development took them off and put on the curement, my staff, an attorney

Key individuals and offices outside metal bandits and now it looks advisor, and the Army's contract

of a program office have the capacity like the rest of the ship. It was a policy expert. In other words, I

to exert tremendous influence, positive visible response to somebody's had to go in there and literally and negative, on a program. Program concern. A cheap investment to stack the deck in terms of inmanagers must understand that their gain fleet acceptance. fluence and independent

overall success is highly dependent on representatives who would

their ability to cultivate and maintain Strategic Influence vouch for what I had said.

relationships with these external For the most part, program manaplayers. gers have limited positional power. Interpersonal Assessment

No program manager can afford to Even with contractors, the terms and I

manage from behind a desk. The ac- conditions of a contract are seldom Human resource problems of proquisition system is too complex to sufficiently black and white to allow gram management are most efficiently

allow a program manager the luxury program managers to tell contractors handled by managers who recognize

of relying on existing policies and exactly what to do. Program mana- and take into account the strengths,

procedures. gers, therefore, need to be able to in- weaknesses and interests of others.

Program Manager 28 May-June 1990
Most program managers inherit what we call people. It only mat- tractor to come up with this profully staffed offices. At the same time, ters who's really in charge; not gram. I never got involved with

effective program managers demon- what you call people.' I knew the details. That is not my job.

strate little reluctance in moving peo- that. They knew that. So who

pie around within the program office cares as long as the job gets done. On the other hand, average program

to maximize using their skills. In a per- I made everybody a manager managers often describe their detailed

sonnel management situation, a Navy and in 2 years we were able to involvement in issues that could easily

captain enlists the aid of a commander field this system. have been handled by others, while

he perceives as having both requisite Effective program managers demon- major roadblocks like an absence of

skills and significant limitations: strate this attribute when taking con- funding or unresolved strategic priI had one guy, a commander, troversial positions in defense of im- orities remain relatively unattended.

who was really good, not so portant principles. A program manamuch on the technical side but on ger, faced with a contractor not play- Effective program managers master

the operational and administra- ing by the rules, proposes sending a let- a few strategically important areas,

tive side, so I had him work with ter to the contractor giving him 24 leaving the mass of administrative and

me to pull this thing together. In- hours to submit a bid or be declared technical matters to subordinates.

terestingly enough, he was one of non-responsive: Since their activity requires absence

the best leaders I had ever run The legal world said that we from their offices for extended periods,

across so I could use him to in- might get a protest out of program managers must be comfortspire people. A great manager, somebody. My answer was: 'So able working through others. An

but not good enough to be what?' I mean, the worst that Army colonel describes dependence on

captain, can happen in a protest is that we his subordinates:

go back and get our best and

Less effective program managers final when we get through, I've put a lot of faith in the

provide illustrations of what happens which is what you want to do civilians I have assigned as heads

in situations where such common- now. But what we have done, of my program management disense is absent. For example, a deputy even if somebody does protest, vision, my technical manageprogram manager responsible for field- is: one, we dare them to protest; ment division, as well as in my

ing a piece of equipment in Korea and two, we have told him you deputy. I feel very confident that

described sending someone who had a can't run us-you are going to things will be kept going when I

difficult time relating to users and have to play by our rules. That go down to OSD for a week or

ultimately incurred costs of replacing was my position. It didn't seem so. I trust my organization. I'm

the individual and having to person- in our best interest to let this guy the one to get involved in the big

ally fight the fire that individual had run us. I said: 'I'm not going to issues where we have major

created. do it your way.' problems.

Assertiveness Most senior officers have had line

For many program managers, the experience and seldom have difficulty Results Orientation

normal linear chain of command be- being assertive with subordinates. Pro- In an effort to focus activity and atcomes multidimensional. Resistance or gram managers, however, operate in tention, effective program managers

opposition can come from many influ- an environment where responsibility communicate specific, concrete goals

ential stakeholders. If they are to re- and rank are not as congruent. Con- for what they want to achieve. Resultstain control of their programs, pro- sequently, program managers must be oriented behavior is evidenced by the

gram managers must be willing to dig prepared to use force of personality best program managers in establishing

their heels in and withstand subtle and and confidence to make up for what their priorities and objectives.

not-so subtle pressures from those with they lack by way of rank. In order to get this acquisition ostensibly more power. One program Managerial Orientation plan approved, I had to go to

manager describes resistance experi- both houses of the Secretariat

enced when he tried to provide on-site Effective program managers do not because I had both development

managers with greater authority in try to do everything themselves. dealing with contractors by changing Rather, they focus effort on building money and production money. dealingThe boss and I had a bit of a bet

their titles: a program office team to handle the

I got back to the base and told myriad decisions and details that going to have with the

them how we were going to do epitomize even the smallest programs. Secretariat on the acquisition it. There were a lot of senior peo- An Air Force colonel, for example, plan. Let me just say that the acple who jumped up and said, clearly reveals his willingness to quisition plan cleared both sides

'Now we're in for a real disaster. delegate detailed tasks: of the Secretariat in 26 days

Nobody's in charge.' I said: My role in the restructuring was which was unheard of by anyone

'Don't think for a moment to task the organization to work in this building. I won a beer

nobody's in charge. Who cares with the user and with the con- based on that one.

Program Manager 29 May-June 1990
Critical Inquiry Focus on Excellence innovativeness and creative problem

With few exceptions, program man- Standards of excellence set by the solving. As an example, one program

agers must make decisions in situations program manager become standards of manager explains the benefits achieved

where they have limited information, the program's performance above and in adopting an unorthodox acquisition

The best program managers stay on beyond engineering specifications and strategy:

top of their programs by consistently service requirements. I have in my own small way with

going beyond the information given, In this example, a Marine colonel this program taken a different

probing for information, checking in- had to choose between continuing approach to achieve an objective

formation, and asking the "what-if" delivery and issuing a waiver, or forc- that would be unattainable in the

questions. ing the contractor to redo the product. traditional sense, because my

At this meeting, I asked the con- Although he determined that the im- community would never have

tractor what they knew about pact of the problem would not be the funding to buy. I just never

the subcontractor status. You major, he elected to have the contrac- would have been given the reknow, where precisely are they? tor redo the product. sources. But by doing it this way,

What are their plans to do this? I can get the system within afWith each answer, I would just The contractor was giving us in- fordable limits and I can give the

ask one question deeper than ferior quality material. I think tactical decision-maker a lot

that. When they started to stut- the contractor felt I would con- more value than he otherwise

ter, I knew they were in trouble tinue to let things be shipped. I would have had.

because I shouldn't be able to go made the hard decision and had

that one-level deeper and ask a to do a lot of explaining to the

question they can't answer. My Marine Corps why we wouldn't Optimizing

guys ought to be able to do that, be shipping for two months. But Schedule slippages, engineering

but if I can do that, it irks me. it had to be done right. So they complications or software problems

Most primes don't like to get beat went back and redid them and need not derail a program, provided

up. They get their feelings hurt did them right, the program manager is ready to

when a PM can walk in and ask Program managers, as noted earlier, quickly assess the situation, know

questions they can't answer. I deprndpogrm manags, as ncmmotd alternatives, and choose a course of acsaid: 'You guys ought to be ab- depend upon staffs. It is a common tion wisely. Tough decisions involve

solutely skolu embarrassed ueasos yout that I can can refrain managers among that one's superior staff has program to con- not make only a choice) the need but, to more be importantly, decisive (to

ask you questions you can't sist of the highest quality people: the a ome th oe ased

answer.' the ability to make that choice based

Long-Term Perspective The first thing you do is get the on a careful analysis of the

right people. My contractors options.

The best program managers inter- have made an observation. They

pret events and contemplate key deci- told me I don't have many peo- Faced with a subcontractor's inabilsions from a broad mission perspective ple here but the ones I've got are ity to perform and unwillingness to

and with an eye toward future conse- terrific. And, that's exactly the cooperate, one Air Force colonel con- quences of those events or way they were picked. tinues to exert pressure while also seekdecisions. Innovativeness/Initiative ing alternatives in the event of the

Top-performing program managers worst case:

look ahead to deployment and sup- Program life cycles and the relaport, and use that framework to shape tively short tenure of most program I had been suggesting they might

immediate decisions: managers combine to ensure that program managers will repeatedly be not be in a good position for Air

We don't make the missiles. We faced with novel situations and deci- Force contracts in the future if

deliver canisters to weapon sta- sions. At such junctures, program they didn't deliver on this. Also,

tions and the missiles and managers can rely on established prac- 1 started to go out and look at

canisters come together there. tices or endeavor to find more effec- alternatives. As a matter of fact,

But I saw a big mismatch. We tive solutions. Superior program this afternoon I'm going to apwere heading to a point where, managers challenge boundaries and ac- prove a small study. It's to see although it was years away from cepted procedures by developing new what the viability of another

happening, things would start to ways to improve their programs. company is as an alternative to

diverge. But action needed to be this thing. We're also going to

taken right then and there, so Most program managers are seldom use that as leverage to get the

that in 1990 we would have in a position to make significant subcontractor working. We have

enough canisters to go around technical contributions to their pro- some options, though not many.

and support the missile base. grams. Rather, it is often in contract- The alternative company does

That was the driving factor in ing situations that the program not precisely fit our parameters

what I was doing. managers demonstrate a flourish for but comes close enough.

Program Manager 30 May-June 1990
Systematic Thinking several days I just wore him million expenditure for tooling, this

Having a grasp on the big picture is down to a point where he said: program manager decided to do some

seldom sufficient to become a suc- 'Alright, we'll buy the things. sleuthing on his own:

cessful program manager. Program Just get off our case.' I went out to the plant a couple

managers have to be well organized to Effective program managers are sen- of times where they're building

stay in control of the huge volume of sitive to unnecessary delays. For peo- two prototypes and looked at

details, procedural and administrative ple of action eager to get programs their planning for the production

guidelines, and the inherent complex- moving, the continuous and ongoing line and talked to individuals on

ity of the weapon systems being delays are a tremendous source of the floor and asked casual quesdeveloped. Most effective managers frustration. Most delays, however, are tions and I found out they had

accomplish this by building and main- imbedded in the acquisition process. not started the planning for tooltaining a well-organized and staffed But, successful program managers do ing at that point. So they

program office. not become inured to these delays and couldn't have spent any money countless obstacles: at all.

Few things are left to chance for the Io hve obs tacles: In al.

program manager. In particular, brief- I have to show them that I have In many respects, the above brief

ings are approached with the knowl- an executable program or they descriptions and illustrations fail to inge apoche withd thsure kn - will throw me out. They will adequately reflect the complexity inedge that nothing would ensure success throw out the Army but I will be herent in program managers' jobs.

more than extensive, exhaustive, and the lead guy going out the door. Most program managers do, in fact,

thorough preparation: They will tell us to go back possess each of the above attributes to

We started gathering the am- again.... I don't want to go back some degree. However, our study inmunition to go up the manage- again. All I have done for the last dicated that it is the outstanding proment chain. We were preparing year and a half is brief this pro- gram manager who is more likely to

all the documentation. I got very gram and defend it. I want to get demonstrate more of these competeninvolved in analyzing for our on with building it. cies in any given situation and hence

people the implications of what In sum, effective program managers perform more effectively.

was being said. I got a hold of all are doers, not caretakers, technicians In addition, significant differences

the various reports. I read every or place holders. exist even among effective program

one, cover-to-cover, marked managers. The above competency

them up in red, brought in tech- Proactive Information Gathering model is not a "cookie cutter" prescripnica people, talked in detail on Many formal methods of monitor- tion of what program managers ought

each one of the issues. I took ing program status exist to keep pro- to do. Some program managers input from everybody. We pre- gram managers up-to-date. The best demonstrated skills and styles appared the briefing and our program managers do not rely solely propriate to tough turnaround situacounterpoints of what we felt on institutionalized methods; they tions, while others demonstrated the

were legitimate points, prefer to gather information first skills needed to resolve delicate, exterhand. nal issues.

Action Orientation TGiven the above caveats, a few gen- Action Orientation The best program managers believe eral statements about program manaThe best program managers are men in going to the source as opposed to gers can still be made. First and of action. When problems are iden- depending on secondary sources or foremost, program managers are

tified, swift action follows. When goals allowing the opposition to prepare a leaders. They see the bigger picture.

are impeded, alternatives are pursued case. Within 10 days of assuming his work the important issues, and keep

to achieve them. Action in many in- new role as program manager, a col- their team focused on fielding an effecstances amounts to persistence in pur- onel uncovered what appeared to be tive system for the user. Their emsuit of an objective. This program significant software problems. His phasis is primarily external and

manager describes tactics used to get response was not to dig anymore but involves extensive relationship

the contractor to capitalize the soft- to go directly to the source: building and influence to resolve

ware development: The first thing I did was I called significant program issues.

I did everything from crying up the (contractor's) program Endnotes

'We can't afford it' to 'It's mor- manager. I suggested he come up

ally wrong what you're doing.' I for a visit and give me his view 1. Gadeken, O.C., "DSMC Studies

knew that person had been using of the world. Program Manager Competencies,"

his production program for the In line with this aggressive ap- Program Manager, Jan.-Feb. 1989, pp.

last 10 years and had plenty of proach, successful program managers 42-44.

capitalization money available. I demonstrate the ability to grasp 2. Gadeken, O.C., 'The Right Stuff:

had my deck of cards, my old quickly the essence of a situation. En- Results of DSMC's Program Manager

cards, and I just played them trenched in negotiations with a con- Competency Study," Program

back and forth and finally after tractor who steadfastly claimed a $7 Manager, Sep.-Oct. 1989, pp. 22-25.

Program Manager 31 May-June 1990
TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT

DISCUSSION GUIDE

Robert W. Ball

Director of Publications

A merican business and the U.S. Government have been awakened by the growing

demand for quality improvement. Quality watchwords such as total customer

satisfaction, best-in-class, and total quality management have become commonplace as

business and government adopt them along with accompanying attitudes.

The U.S. Government has established an annual quality award. In 1987, legislation

establishing an annual United States Malcom Baldridge National Quality Award was signed

into law by President Ronald Reagan. Its purpose is to promote quality awareness, recognize

quality achievements of U.S. companies and publicize successful quality strategies. In

November 1988, the President presented the first National Quality Awards and said, "You

can take great pride in the knowledge that you are benefiting your customers, your companies and your country.... The more American Companies become obsessed with quality, the more we all stand to profit."

At the Defense Systems Management College, anything short of total quality is unacceptable. Other government agencies and many businesses have adopted this attitude, which

is making visible progress.

Quality applies to all functions, all organizations and all employees. It must have longterm commitment with significant employee involvement. It must involve everyone in the

organization.

At DSMC, the watchword is Total Quality Management. Several industries use the same

words or a variation thereof. The 3M Corporation, for example, calls its program Managing Total Quality.

Recognizing that Total Quality Management requires the involvement and understanding of everyone in the organization, Jack Cohen, Director, of Total Quality Management

Implementation for the McDonnell Douglas Missile Systems Company, prepared this Total

Quality Management Discussion Guide for supervisors and leaders of small groups to

facilitate discussions and understanding. We believe Program Manager readers will find

the guide interesting and useful. Mr. Cohen may be contacted by writing to:

Jack Cohen

Director, Total Quality Management Implementation

McDonnell Douglas Missile Systems Company

P.O. Box 516 MC 1063384

St. Louis, MO 63166

Program Manager 32 May-June 1990
TOTA QUAITY- THALIDOMIDE

TOTA QUAITY- THREE MILE ISLAND MANAGEMENT - BHOPAL DISCUSSION 'GUIDE - THE CHALLENGER

- CHERNOBYL

ANCIENT CHINESE ADAGE PHILOSOPHY

IF WE DON'T CHANGE PROMOTE CHANGE DIRECTIONS SOON, WE ARE AMID ORDER WHILE

WHERE 

DOOMED To END tip PRESERVING ORDER WE ARE HEADED AMID CHANGE

QUESTION:.US~N

Wher wasDoes change have to cause stress?

THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE

PAST OPERAViON THE TOM DEFINITION WAY

Set A PROCESS IS AN ACTIVITY THAT TAKES AN INPUT, 0. If- jndegtn Do the m- rv ADDS VALUE AND PRODUCES

job jobAN OUTPUT

Get

QUESTIION:

Does this make senseft Is it easy to do?

Program Manager 33 May-Junte 1990
ACCOUNTABILITY 

CUTOE

EACH 

A SINGLE PROCESS 

INDIVIDUAL MUST 

HELD 

HAVE C T THE OUTPUT OF A PROCESS

SUCCESS, 

ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE .. GOES TO A CUSTOMER, OPERATION AND EITHER INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL IMPROVEMENT OF THE TO THE ORGANIZATION

PROCESS AND ITS DATA

QUESTION: QUESTION: Why? Can you provide examples?

", FIT FOR USE

CUSTOMER WHEN YOU RECEIVE SOMETHING: SATISFACTION IS REWORK REQUIRED?

IS DATA REENTRY REQUIRED?

THE KEY TO SURVIVAL DO YOU HAVE TO WASTE YOUR AND SUCCESS TIME BECAUSE IT'S DIFFICULT TO USE WHAT YOU RECEIVED?

QUESTION:

QUESTION: What do "YES" answers to any of the

S Do above mean? you agree? What about things you pass on to

internal customers or delivery to

external customers?

PARTICIPATION MEASUREMENT

EVERYONE MUST PARTICIPATE IN THE IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS. SYSTEMS ANALYSIS PROVIDES A METHOD OF ANALYZING

THE 

THE 

JOB 

PERSON PERFORMING AN ORGANIZATION'S PROCESSES IS THE BEST ONE TO

IMPROVE IT. QUESTION:

Do we need an analyst to help us QUESTION: 'measure our efficiency?

What is the payback for you iDo we need to bring in someone from

and your team? outside our organization to establish

measurements for us?raM 9

Program Manager 34 May-June 1.990
. ' - -, ... . 4' " "

FINANCIAL MEASURES F A I AWORTHLESS +, .. MEASURES

INFORMATION SYSTEMS

THAT ARE PREDOMINANTLY "- FINANCIAL IN NATURE ARE -- MEASURES ARE WORTHLESS

INADEQUATE TO SUPPORT IF THEY DO NOT CONTRIBUTE

CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT TO FURTHER IMPROVEMENT

INITIATIVES

QUESTION: QUESTION: What measurements do you want Are you currently making any posted in your work areas? worthless measures?

EMPOWERMENT DATA

THOSE WHO ASK THE QUALITY PROCESSES

TOUGH QUESTIONS DEPEND ON

ARE WELL ON THE QUALITyDATA

ROAD TO MAKING OUT DATA

THE " " RIGHT DECISIONS QETO \ QUESTION:

Are your written procedures, work

QUESTION: instructions, drawings, etc., 1o0/

What are your tough questions? correct?

"IT AIN'T BROKE" IMPROVEMENT

CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT IS A WAR AGAINST HABIT CAN BE MADE

A HABIT

QUESTION:

Do you believ~e,QUSIN "(f it isn't broke, don't fix it?" Where do we go from here?

Program Manager 35 May-June 1990
very day newspapers are rife with articles about our conducted under the auspices of an advisory group comrelationships with our many Allies. Every year we prising Office of the Secretary of Defense cosponsors and

develop hundreds of defense-related agreements with these the highest level international action officers from the Army,

same Allies. Until the Defense Systems Management Col- Navy and Air Force.

lege launched the Advanced International Management The most exciting aspect of the workshop is the classroom

Workshop (AIMW) in December 1989, there was no educa- exercises. Students are broken out into teams, provided a

tion program anywhere for training our international realistic international scenario, and directed to prepare

negotiators in these types of agreements, even though some specific sections of an MOU, such as financial provisions, of the agreements potentially committed billions in defense third-party sales and transfers, disclosure and use of

expenditures! technical information, project management structure, work

There exists a common perception that we do not do very sharing, contractual arrangements, etc.

well in our negotiation of international defense agreements, On the last evening of the workshop, teams are assigned

especially those related to cooperative research and develop- national (allied) identities, and provided guidance from their

ment. There is also a perception that we, unlike our Allies, time-after-time tional negotiations. send different, Also, unlike untrained some of people our Allies, to interna- goveanentsredi the otia s. Th is the guidance is not shared with the other teams. That evening

a working dinner is held, and students begin the role-play United States has never established permanent negotiating associated with their assigned national identities. This is very

teams. While this may be attributable, at least in part, to realistic, as much negotiation in foreign countries actually

the vast size of our defense establishment and our person- occurs in a social environment.

nel systems, one way that we can address this problem is

through education and training. This was recognized by personnel within the Office of the Secretary of Defense, which Mock Negotiation

sponsored and funded the workshop development. The next day a mock negotiation is conducted. Results

The Advanced International Management Workshop are analyzed and critiqued by instructors, class, and outcovers all aspects of the negotiation of international defense side experts. More than half of the students believed that

cooperation agreements, commonly referred to as Memo- this was the most valuable aspect of the course. An approval

randa of Understanding (MOUs). While an MOU can be rating this high for an exercise is unprecedented.

developed during any phase of a defense program, the On January 10, 1990, the DSMC Commandant received

AIMW focuses on the earlier research and development a letter from Eleanor R. Spector, Deputy Assistant Secretary phases. Various aspects of an MOU are covered in the of Defense (Procurement). She stated: "My staff informs me

workshop-from the nature, process and procedures to that the success of the workshop exceeded their high expecspecific negotiation issues such as project management, tations." She said, "I am pleased that the actions necessary finance, industrial arrangements, contracting, acquisition to establish the AIMW as a regular course offering during strategies, technology transfer, intellectual property rights, fiscal year 1990 and beyond are well underway. I believe

third-party sales and transfers, information security, claims this course will play a significant role in improving the skills

and liability, resolution of disputes, integrated logistics sup- of United States negotiators of International Memoranda of

port, cost sharing, and work sharing. Understanding."

Guest Lecturers Future plans for the Workshop are exciting. The first production offering is scheduled for June 18-22, 1990. Three Perspectives on these international agreements are pro- regular offerings are planned for fiscal 1991 at DSMC.

vided by guest lecturers from the Office of the Secretary of

Defense Industrial & International Programs, Foreign Con- Interested, potential students should submit applications

tracting, General Counsel, International Security, and quickly, as we expect these offerings to be as oversubscribed

Comptroller. Representatives from the Commerce Depart- as the December pilot offering. The workshop is open to

ment provide their viewpoints on the domestic industrial mid-level military officers, government civilians, and inbase impacts of these agreements and the U.S. Office of Per- dustry equivalents currently in or entering positions of

sonnel Management addresses the role of the Congress. Ses- responsibility in international or potentially international

sions are conducted by experienced DSMC faculty on defense programs. Regrettably, we are unable to accomculturdl sensitivity and international negotiation. Much of modate allied students at this time.

the course material and core lectures were developed under We plan to produce a guidebook on negotiation strategy

contract with Information Resources Technology, Inc., Falls for international defense cooperation MOUs. Your cornChurch, Virginia. The entire workshop development was ments and inquiries are welcome.

Program Manager 36 May-June 1990
Richard Kwatnoski

Explanation of AIMW Logo

The logo illustrates the flag of the United States in the center. Surrounding the U.S. flag are those of

the organization/Inations with which the United States can enter into defense cooperation agreements. The

Nunn and Qua yle Amendments facilitate and encourage cooperative programs with the NATO nations,

Japan, Australia, the Republic of Korea, Israel, and Egypt.

Mr. Kwmoski, a profrssor of engimem'qq manogrment at the

Defime Sysww1 Maqwgmnt College, iu COre Dimvtor for the

Advanced Intmatiopwd Mamigement Workshop.

Program Manager 37 May-June 1990
ACQUISITION

RESEARCH

SYMPOSIUM

Joan A SUCCESS:

he Defense Systems Management College (DSMC) formation is presented, it becomes overwhelming. Research

and the National Contract Management Association must be simple to be understood; therefore, it is important

(NCMA), Washington, D.C. Chapter, co-sponsored the not to "snow" the audience. Research can deliver bad news,

well-received 1989 Acquisition Research Symposium at the but let them call it like it is; the result of research is not an

Hyatt Regency, Capitol Hill, October 17-19, 1989. More end in inself.

than 200 acquisition personnel attended. Lieutenant Colonel

Dave Scibetta, USA, DSMC, and Ms. Donna Ireton, Be Consistent

NCMA, co-chaired the conference assisted by program co- Mr. Paul S. Stevens, partner of Dickstein, Shapiro &

chairs, Mr. Calvin Brown, DSMC, and Mr. Edwin Phelps, Morin, guest speaker, played a crucial role in preparing

NCMA. Planning for the next symposium has begun with Secretary Richard B. Cheney's Defense Management Review

the dates set for June 4-6 1991. Requests for abstracts will (DMR) for President George Bush. Stevens noted the DMR

be distributed soon (See p.13). purpose is to provide a consistent set of objectives. The

The symposium, latest in a series begun in 1972 and last DMR recommendations include: a detailed approach to

managing the Department of Defense; a framework for conducted in 1985, was a dynamic forum for dialogue senior management combined with participation and inamong key professionals working on vital issues facing the volvement at all levels; revising the threshold phase of

acquisition community. Attendees were senior officials, pro- Department of Defense planning and budgeting; delegating

gram managers, staff officers and researchers from the a high degree of authority to the Under Secretary of Defense

Department of Defense, federal civilian agencies, academia for Acquisition; streamlining and reducing the cost of operaand industry. The theme, "Solutions to Today's Acquisi- tions; markedly improving acquisition corps personnel, intion Problems," reflects the prevalence of innovation and cluding establishing a professional corps in each Service, and

change in the acquisition process. Papers written concerned special education and training for this corps to attract com- latest research and development as documented by in- petent professionals to fill management positions; and, a

dividuals involved in many aspects of the acquisition high order of accountability.

process. The luncheon speaker, Mr. D. Kenneth Richardson, ex- Major General Lynn H. Stevens, USA, DSMC Comman- ecutive vice president, Hughes Aircraft Company, pointed

dant, gave the opening remarks and introduced thp keynote out how far industry has come in making changes. Industry

speaker, Mr. Norman R. Augustine, chief executive officer has been plagued with criticism, some deserved, some of Martin Marietta Corporation. Augustine applauded distorted-accusations of shoddy workmanship, undisciDSMC trips to Japan and Korea to study business manage- plined methods, cost overruns, unfulfilled performance

ment. Using charts, he demonstrated that the same research promises, etc. Industry has worked hard to change its imdata can be interpreted in many ways. He said that many age, breaking out of the traditional way of thinking-downwould say the acquisition process is broken today. sizing, teaming, investing and accepting total quality

Mr. Augustine explained that to help correct this dilemma, management, which is a positive development. Richardson

there is need for high-quality research; inconsistent research said Hughes has broken out of the traditional way of thinkis not helpful. Many research projects begin with good in- ing and embraced benefit rather than worrying about risk.

tentions but are distracted. When the study is done, the real Upper and middle management learned to cooperate with

work begins. There are problems to ineffective research: customers and yield power to workers, which has meant

inept analysis or a bogging down in the elegance of research. a realistic relationship with management coupled with new Many times a researcher knows too much and when the in- responsibility and power.

Program Manager 38 May-June .1990
bility and improved design. It is permissible for contractors to make

money from warranties since they

have marketed guarantees that

work.

Highly Educated During the first two days of the sym- posium, research papers judged

On October 19 morning, the guest meritorious by a committee were

speaker Ms. Colleen Preston, assistant presented and discussed in breakout

general counsel, House Armed Ser- sessions. In these sessions, authors

vices Committee, discussed studies presented papers on topic areas inregarding the acquisition work force. cluding Project Management, Pricing

One particular study was done by and Cost Estimating, Financial

Nicholas Mavroules (D-Mass). His Management and Budgeting, Systems

study shows the acquisition work force Acquisition, Competition, Research

Joint Logistics Commanders to be highly educated; procurement and Development, Automation,

The October 18 morning session professionals are better educated than Human Resources, Warranties, Total

began with a Joint Logistics Coin- employees in any other federal Quality Management, Acquisition

manders Panel comprising General agency. Process/Methodology, Productivity,

Bernard Randolph, USAF; General Mr. Robert E. Pursley, president Commercial Practices, and Incentives.

William Tuttle, Jr., USA; Vice and chief executive officer of the Titles included: "Spending Instability

Admiral Stanley Arthur, USN; Major Logistics Management Institute, noted and Acquisition Costs," (Abellera);

General Charles Henry, USA; and there are many congressional "Exchange Rates and Product Cost,"

Major General Robert Swarts, USAF. drawbacks to the Defense Manage- (Frisch); "Acquisition Research: The

They fielded queries in a question and ment Review. His speech was titled Past is Prologue," (Judson); and, "Can

answer format. Major Ceneral Stevens "The Acquisition Recipe: A Missing In- Award Fee Contracts Substantially Immoderated this discussion. These of- gredient." The public believes the prove the Acquisition Process?"

ficers expressed desires to have military defense acquisition process is not (Kennedy). Presenters from the

personnel remain in acquisition posi- working, and that there has been a Defense Systems Management College

tions. Each Service has professional deterioration since 1986. The crucial were Mr. Henry Alberts, Dr. Franz

military officials with valuable opera- ingredient lacking is leadership, and Frisch, Mr. James Abellera, Mr.

tional experience; hence, they "know this is the key formula for effective Miguel Otegui, Mr. Michael Krause

how the system works." Questions reform. Since we need to focus on and Mr. Forrest Gale. Lieutenant Colconcerned research topics, weakeni ig leadership, the constant attention to onel Bruce Sweeny and Commander

of the government procurement work reorganization is a distraction we must Charles Perkins, 1988 DSMC Research

force, and possibility of a simplified supress. The long-term trend is toward Fellows, participated.

procurement statute. Popular discus- unification, a modification, away from

sion topics like total quality manage- the decentralized role of the military Volume of 75 Papers

ment and decline of the industrial base departments. Acquisition research Accepted papers and abstracts were

were debated, topics that NCMA and DSMC should printed in a large volume. The DSMC

study include whether reforms have and NCMA selected 75 papers for inMr. James Goggins, executive direc- been eveny implemented, and whether clusion in the book of proceedings; Of

tor, NCMA, gave a speech prepared the organizational changes work. the 75 Dapers, 33 papers were selected

by W. Gregor Macfarlan, vice presi- for presentation. This volume is

dent of Education and Certification, Effective Warranties aib available p upon on reus request tolDSMCi to DSMC,

NCMA. The speech concerned acquisi- Dr. Jacques S. Gansler, senior vice ATTN: DRI-R, Fort Belvoir, VA

tion research and the focus it must president, The Analytic Sciences Cor- 22060-5426.

have on people and the process. poration, beginning his closing address

with a discussion of warranties, said

The October 18 afternoon guest they require sound management judg- Ms. Sable is assd to the Research

speaker was Mr. Jack Davin, assistant ment to be effective. Warranties must -irurate at the Defense SyWms Manaepostmaster general, U.S. Postal Ser- be announced before the design so that ment College. She had an active role in

vice. Transient trends in his industry they can be incorporated to assure the planning the Acquisition Research

are the buy-and-supply global econ- system does not fail. Warranty cost is Synposium.

omy and the technology explosion of trivial; we will reap rewards of reliainformation management.

Program Manager 39 May-June 1990
TO TESTIFY

OR BRIEF

UNDER ADVERSITY

Robert A. Warrn

program manager and staff will give hundreds of out why and position yourself to achieve the best outcome.

1 information and decision briefings to The situation may not permit a programmatic win, but you

diverse audiences like the Congress, the military services, can lose less by representing yourself and your organizaforeign governments, industry, government agencies, tion in a professional and dignified manner.

auditors and investigators, interest groups, associations, and Have a Strategy. In an adversarial setting, you are not

the media. Most will be to friendly or neufral audiences; just answering questions. There are major themes and ideas

however, because of litigious and combative trends in permeating the give and take of inquiry, and you are ex- society, some will be given to audiences whose motives are pected to represent the themes effectively. How you respond

opposed to the program and the military. How the program is as important as what you say, and there are different

management team handles communications in the face of choices and methods to convey a message. Tell the truth

adversity and hostility affects not only the program but in- but make sure you can maintain flexibility, which comes dividual and organizational reputations. My premise is that from understanding pros and cons of the situation, and senthe program management team is a collection of experts who sitivities and hostilities of interest groups. Avoid absolutes,

need to understand the tools and mechanisms relating to suc- certainties and tightly drawn answers, especially in the inicess in this environment. tial portion of adversarial discussions. This will give you

time to refine your thinking without appearing to be evasive

Preparing to Testifying or neglectful.

It may be self evident but, if you are going to testify, know Pre-briefs Are Important to the Preparation Process.

why you are there, your role and your position. Staff the Where possible, get biographies on all players involved in

position thoroughly and in writing if possible. Clear it the testimony or briefing, and seek information on personal

through public or congressional affairs channels. Don't let interests and advocacy positions. The more you know about

the position get stale, especially if the decision-making en- motivations of people the easier it is to brief and converse. vironment is changing rapidly. Today s "sheet of music for Many program managers have failed because they promote

everyone" may be tomorrow's basis for major conflict, self rather than audience interests.

The role of the program management team is not as clear Use murder boards. Involve public affairs and governas the charter and organization chart indicate. Core cost, ment attorneys, but do not depend on them for the posischedule, and performance issues may be well defined, but tion to be taken.

program margins ebb and flow. The personal and profes- Before an interrogation, chit chat with people asking quessional leeway available is a function of the management pro- tions. Avoid the subject but probe for experience, incess and also of other people's confidence in you and your telligence and skills in interviewing techniques.

team. An order to "Do your best" is not the same as "Don't

goof up."

It is not unusual for a person to be pressed into service Mr. Warren teaches in the Simulation Dtwirtment, DSMC,

because of convenience, availability, or less than a charitable lecturing on 'Expert Wimess" tools and techniques.

reason. If you are to testify or brief under adversity, find

Program Manager 40 May-June 1990

rnai ~ mm a almal im~l mmiia amin ,.-dL-
Stage Setting Is an Important Part of dience. A jury in a courtroom and Adversarial Hearings or Briefings

Interview. Admiral Hyman Rickover, people watching television at home are Have Substantive Emotional Content.

USN, was well known for making in- presumed to be neutral unless other- Anger is usually inappropriate if you

terviews pressure packed by creating wise advised. A mishandled interroga- are trying to be convincing as it tends

a climate of physical, mental and emo- tion process may work in your interest to give a go-for-broke image. If you

tional discomfort. You can combat even if you make mistakes, fumble for work for the Department of Defense,

techniques designed to increase your words or seem uncomfortable, it can give you the reputation of being

discomfort. Select the location or If you know the audience to be a hot head. If you are being abused,

check it out. Before and during inter- hostile, acknowledge it. Maintain your righteous indignation bordering on

rogation, adjust the immediate en- dignity by not responding in kind to anger may be effective; however, you

vironment to suit yourself: If the bullying or insulting tactics. In most are probably better off taking a break.

microphone is in the wrong place, adversarial situations, it is best to keep Embarrassment is often unavoidable

move it; if lights are blinding, request answers short and to the point. This and may generate sympathy, espea change; if the testifying or briefing minimizes exposure by limiting your cially if handled extremely well, with

process will take a long time, be sure opponent's information-gathering professionalism and a little humor, or

plenty of water is available; and pre- opportunities. extremely poorly, like resorting to

define and take food, stretch, and tears. Don't tell jokes, be sarcastic or

comfort breaks. Interviewer, Not Audience, Con- flippant. Folksy analogies can be ac- trols Questions. If the situation is com- ceptable because serious situations The military uniform is a powerful petitive and combative, use your have their lighter moments. symbol. When wearing it, you project answer to control facts, reflect profes- living history and elicit sterotypes. Use sional opinions and organization posi- Adversarial Environment Is at

the uniform wisely and with discre- tions, and control pace and dynamics Times Hard to Believe. Various games

tion. During the Iran-Contra hearings, during discussions. Don't rush or be are used to increase pressure. OppoLieutenant Colonel Oliver North, rushed. Anticipate where a line of nents may try to exhaust (no food,

USMC, wore his uniform. Think of the questioning is going but answer the water or breaks), deceive, confuse,

clarity and impact of his image. question at hand. A good attorney will change inquiry pace and timing, inThis may be a radical notion but often ask half a question and pause for timidate, and threaten. Corporate, consistency often counts more than ac- an impatient interviewee to finish it. programmatic, professional and percuracy. A hostile interviewer looks for Above all, listen: with interest and sonal survival on both sides of the

outright mistakes or weaknesses, and with a commitment to give your best issue may be involved. A truly adver-.

otright istoaat weaknesseo an s , sarial situation is a free-for-all and

tries to create weakness by picking on answer. nearly anything can happen.

inconsistency or the appearance of It Is Important to Establish Credibil- To handle pressure, be a leader.

inconsistency. The prepared statement, ity Early On. If possible, state your When on the defensive, keep answers

key points to be inserted during discus- professional, organizational, educa- short and to the point. When on the sions, and closing remarks should tional and experiential credentials, or offensive, be expansive to achieve the Ifhesiuationy oeer pto s mpe, use an early question to show the greatest gain for your position but be If the situation or position is complex, depth and breadth of your knowledge. controlled and wary. When the situa- use notes, ready references, a strategy Be succinct. Do not use a question that tion is an even give-and-take, wait for support people. Care is indicated here is part of the dispute to show knowl- an opportunity to take the offensive. because a skillful interrogator will use edge because an audience can, and Be patient. You will lose battles, but slavish adherence to a predefined use will, confuse controversy with you want to win the war. Think of the tin toakhere o lok upreparned a- credibility. Don't talk down to an au- adversarial communication contest as tion to make you look unprepared and dience. Don't use jargon or abbrevia- a chess and poker game combined. to create a disjointed impression of tions. Use familiar examples or your testimony or presentation analogies to make your point. Questions as Interrogation Tools Remember, new information may Questions have different meanings

change your opinion even though you You Will Make Errors of Omission Q

may not be in a position to respond to and Commission. You will give less in adversarial settings. They are used

it. Be reasonable because the accuracy than the best answer to a question. to solicit facts and opinions and to

of facts and opinions may be in Correct your errors without being create a variety of effects. A good indispute. defensive. Questions are repeated in terrogator can confuse, obtain contradifferent ways during interrogations, dictions, and elicit a negative impresso improve poor answers the next sion of the program and organization

Under Pressure time. Attempts to justify a misstate- by damaging your appearance, even

Identify Audience. One common ment or recover from a mistake though you are factually correct.

mistake is to confuse the hostile inter- magnify the error, cause confusion and Repetitive Questions are among the

viewer with what is otherwise a suggest deception. You are giving "air most common forms of attack. Atneutral, somewhat disinterested au- time" to an opposite position. torneys will repeat a question with difProgram Manager 41 May-June 1990
ferent nuances and word combinations months and years worth of analysis in "I don't know" and an expression of

to obtain contradictions and annoy. a few moments. Change the subject or, "willingness to go further" are satYou can control this by defining posi- if time is limited, discuss minutia to isfactory.

tions in your terms. You can note that pressure the interviewer to cut you off. Lots of Yes and No Answers

questions are repetitive, and the slight Out-Of-Context Questions misrep- Without Embellishment will drain

shades in meaning are irrelevant or resent your position or change the energy from an interrogation. An inrelevant in a way that only you meaning of prior discussions. The pur- terviewer is depending on an informadefine. pose is to destroy position logic, tion exchange. Yes and no do not

Bind Questions have more than one confuse and disarm and give the ap- describe the reasons for choices. If you

interpretation or contain internal con- pearance of contradictions. The good can persist in not explaining or adding

tradictions. For example: Do you think part is they may signal desperation. To information, the interview will end or

it's unpatriotic to disagree with some control such questions, respond clearly the interviewer will start a more proalternative position? Many complica- and stay in control. This may be dif- ductive line of inquiry.

tions can be associated with the ficult in the face of the unethical tac- Inject a Folksy Anecdote, a disarmanswer. A good interrogator will use tics this type of questioning implies. ing tactic signaling an interview shift,

these questions constantly if you are Indicate to interviewer and audience may disrupt the interviewer's thought

on the defensive, or will use them tac- that you are being misquoted and processes and line of questions. If not

tically to create instant confusion or show differences between the mis- adept, the interviewer may stumble

the appearance of evasion. You can quoted position and the position you and immediately lose credibility. A

deal with this type of question by intend to advocate, good interrogator will proceed only

noting problems and inherent contradictions, or you can answer a dif- Significant But Irrelevant Questions when the situation is in control.

ferent but related question. The latter have nothing to do with the subject at Ask for a Break for your personal

approach may not be possible if your hand, or cross position and factual comforts or to confer with attorneys

opponent persists. Further, you may line. Asking you to compare money and support people. Don't be bullied

now have two questions to answer for a new aircraft carrier with help for into answering just one more question,

rather the initial bind. the homeless is ax-grinding or an at- or even the question at hand, if you

tempt to negate your position. Control need a break.

Open Ended Questions with limited such questions by noting you are not The Inte-view Is Over signals time

scope usually take the form of "What there to debate issues belonging at is ntere is othignaos time

do you think about .... 7"The purpose presidential and congressional levels. iscup and there is nothing more to be

is to obtain unexpected disclosure or You could "no comment" such ques- discussed. Use this tactic if you feel

expand the interview discussions. You tions, but this may appear harsh and good about your answers and can only

can be in danger here muchand if you ne say watrs.not nstntlychar too unsympathetic. hurt yourself become by talkative further discussion. and defeat Do

much and instantly chart new waters. Mushy, Vague and Thoughtless yourself. Get off the stage. Be cautious and limit the answer to Questions may indicate a fishing ex- prior-stated positions, facts or pedition, pause, or indicate poor inter- Refuse to Answer When Being opinions. rogator preparation. To control them, Abused Or Misrepresented, but don't

Hypothetical Questions relate to ask for clarification. This puts the ball get angry. It is best to take a break to

issues and facts in the dispute but im- in the court of the interviewer who regain your composure. Further, an inply either a different interpretation of must respond quickly to maintain the terviewer, in the heat of battle, might

the situation or introduce an entirely audience's confidence, not recognize or intend abuse.

new situation. The purpose is to com- Answer as Control and None of these tactics are guaranteed.

pare opposing positions; or focus on nswe aec rani The interview, first and foremost, is in

weakness in the logic of your position. Closure Mechanisms the control of the questioner.

Answer with precision, note implied Unless time is predefined or limited,

contradictions and explain what is it is difficult to finish an inquiry or stop Final Remarks

reasonable. In doing this, you boost a line of questioning. There are,

credibility, however, techniques to control inquiry If you are going to be a good expert

directions, signal closure, or drain witness or briefer, listen well and state

How-Would-You-Do-This Ques- energy from the interrogation process. fundamentals of your position often.

tions invite on-the-spot design of your Don't get in the rut of testifying or

position and are dangerous. This is Lack of Knowledge and Need for briefing to an absolute; situations and

intended to expose limits of your More Think Time Is Useful for facts change. Emphasize strenghts but

thinking. It becomes a trap of increas- Closure. No one knows everything or acknowledge limitations to maintain

ingly complex and detailed questions can instantly provide perfect answers credibility. Be a reasonable human

intended to embarrass you at the limits to complex questions. The natural being. Show you are a leader through

of your knowledge. To control this, in- tendency is to press on through ig- the quality, clarity and consistency of

dicate the inappropriateness of doing norance. Such an act only exposes it. your answers.

Program Manager 42 May-June 1990
WORKING WITH A FULLER DECK

NON-COMMISSIONED OFFICER'S

ROLE IN ACQUISITION PROCESS

7 8

Senior Master Sergeant Kenneth M. Hitz, USAF

A rriving at my present duty assignment, I was My purpose here is to convince you that NCOs can and

astonished at the number of people employed should play important and direct roles in the acquisition

in the acquisition career field. Being a senior non- process.

commissioned officer (NCO) I noticed I was a minority in Presently, NCOs by classification are not assigned to posithis highly important business of Weapons System tions within the acquisition career field, which is structured

Procurement. for officers only. Non-commissioned officers are involved

The acquisition force as a whole employs United States only with acquisition sporadically throughout the acquisiAir Force officers to function mainly as system engineers. tion process by representing the user at various meetings

Also, government Civil Servants perform matrix functions leading up to the procurement process. I believe that the nonof logisitcs, configuration, accounting, contracting, manu- commissioned officer can do more for acquisition if given

facturing and important aspects of acquisition management. a chance. To understand this ongoing problem we will look

I noticed contractor personnel performing management at the problem in three successive steps.

duties throughout the system program office where apparent First, and foremost, we need to understand the history

manning vacancies existed. This seemed to me to be a

reasonable solution to filling these important vacancies by of the NCO role in the acquisition process.

employing qualified personnel but at a high cost to the Second, we will take a close-up view of the problem as

United States Air Force. stated earlier.

The question that came to mind was: Is there another solu- Third, we will look at a possible solution to this ongoing

tion to this apparent serious employment problem? problem.

Program Manager 43 May-June 1990
With the

Acquisition of Public Interest General Lemay said the Air Force

The subject of acquisition (i.e., pro- addition of a prefix, would be short 2,000 scientific and

engineering officers in 1964. I feel these

curement, contracting, defense data are pertinent today. Since the

management) has been given exposure NCOs could be 1960s, the Air Force found it difficult

by the media. You cannot pick up a to recruit and retain scientific and

newspaper or magazine today without identified as engineering personnel. With this in

finding an article about acquisition. mind and given todays upheaval in the

We, members of the United States acquisition defense acquisition management proAir Force, can agree that weapons fession, the problem of a sufficiently

system acquisition is isvtlt vital to our u mis- i- managers,. ulfe manned, okfrei highly asrospolm trained and stable fw

sion accomplishment and national work force is a serious problem. If we

defense. Acquisition caught the public are to stabilize and train this work

interest because of the billions of tO pertbrm force to be highly qualified acquisition

dollars spent each year on procure- managers, something has to be done

ment. The public heard the stories important tasks soon. To stabilize the work force and

about $400 hammers, $850 aircraft properly train engineers in acquisition

management, additional resources will armrests, and the $7,600 coffee pot for within the be needed to fill vacancies in the ac- the C-5 aircraft. I will not argue thatquiincaerfldAswtaynw

we do or do not need acquisition quisition career field. As withanynew

reform, nor will I argue that the system acquisition career acquisition, more people are needed in

is perfect, I contend that within any the beginning than at the end of the ac- quisition process. Who better to utilize

system changes can be made for the field. and support this need than users of

good of that system. that potential weapons system?

In 1986, President Ronald Reagan

chartered the Blue Ribbon Commission The Acquisition Pyramid

on Defense Management headed by Again, quoting Major General

former Deputy Secretary of Defense Yates, "Operational experience is an

David Packard. The report took more integral brick in the acquisition than a year to complete. One of the pyramid." He chaired the cornmost interesting findings was the lack mission that developed the Acquisiof "user participation" in the acquisi- tion Management Career Development

tion process. In an article, Dr. Hisachi Shinto, Program and repeatedly has ex-

"The Air Force spends a third of its President of Nippon Telegraph & pressed concern in the need for operabudget, more than $30 billion, on Telephone, said "Many U.S. com- tional experience (i.e., user).

development and production of panies have ceased the practice of ini- The present Officer Classification

weapon systems. Program managers tially assigning young engineering Guide, AFR 36-1, uses several career

must possess a broad experience base, graduates to the production line, fields in the system acquisition where management process. Now looking at i.e., maintenance and operations. eprec .. mngmn rcs.Nwloiga

These people are hard to get and hard experience..., the Airmen Classification Guide, AFR

to keep. Their experiences make them Several years ago General Curtis 39-1, this guide does not have any

attractive to the private sector, where Lemay, then Air Force Chief of Staff, specific career field for acquisition

they can usually earn more wrote that the most important need of management, nor does it address this

money,"quoting Major General the Air Force is.. .people. Too often in subject. The closest possibility would

Ronald Yates. He said that the job re- these days of supersonic aircraft, be career Specialty Code 65190, the

quires "an intimate understanding of hypersonic rockets, satellites and outer contracting career field. This career

the user's requirements and an ability space probes, the key element tends to field is used mainly for civil engineerto translate those requirements into be overshadowed and forgotten-the ing projects and, as such, is not suited

what we can do with our hardware people who develop, build and operate for acquisition as we know it today in

and software. the new technology. Air Force Systems Command.

Program Manager 44 May-June 1990
Who -would

bcttcr understand

With the problem of a diminishing form similar to an Airmans Perforwork force in the engineering profes- needs and mance Report Fact Sheet used by most

sion, causing instability within the commands, or a one-page resume. The

acquisition career field, it is my opin- requiremrents Of acquisition command would hand-pick

ion that the solution to this ongoing candidates for particular jobs within

problem is evident. Using qualified acquisition management: quality conNCOs to support weapons systems ac- toda\s Air Force trol, training, configuration, manufacquisition would greatly improve the turing, program control, test and

acquisition process as a whole. I do not mission than NCOs evaluation, finance, logistics and

propose to delete, change or under- engineering. These NCOs would fill

mine a career field that has been the working in the the void wherever needed. They would

primary responsibility of the officer be given schooling in the fundamentals

corps. But, I do suggest that NCOs of acquisition and in their areas of

could supplement this void in the trenches? future responsibility before a conacquisition management career field. trolled tour of duty.

With the addition of a prefix, NCOs These NCOs would be able to concould be identified as acquisition tribute immeasurably in areas pertainmanagers, qualified to perform impor- tit imnensab ne o eaos, syte tanttask cquiitin caeering wih he to maintenance, operations, system

tant tasks within the acquisition career limitations, needs and wants, etc. I

field. It is apparent that getting the user have heard several times during 23

involved process is early-on highly in important the acquisition years as a computer technician for yasa optrtcnca successful procurement as is numerous people saying things like: "If emphasized with programs like The basic recruit in the Air Force to- they would have only designed it this BLUE-2 and R&M 2000 (relality and day comes in with a higher degree of way" or "Why didn't they do it that maintainability), maturity than his predecessor, holds a way instead?" high school diploma, more than likely

Non-commissioned officers with has attended college, and possesses a Making It Work

related backgrounds, maintenance ex- positive attitude toward the Air Force. It is obvious that for this solution to

perience and sufficient education could Non-commissioned officers are sub- work the using command must, first,

be nominated by the using command jected to weeks of technical schooling be willing to give up several highly

and accepted by the acquisition com- and years of on-the-job training. The valued assets for several years. Second,

mand to work in the acquisition pro- average NCO has worked on several the using command must pick excepcess during early stages of the process. different systems related to his spe- tional people to do these types of jobs

cialty. Recent statistics taken from required for acquisition management.

Bringing Values to Process graduates of the Senior NCO Acad- Third, the gaining command must

An NCO with a 7-9 skill level has emy (SNCOA) indicate the average utilize these people where they can do

probably been in his particular career NCO has more formal education to- the most good.

field more than 12 years. This operator day than in the past. More than likely You only have to look at AFR 39-1,

and maintenance experience applied to an NCO chosen to work in the acquisi- Airman Classification Guide, to see the

the acquisition process during early tion management career field would be basis of an acquisition career field

stages would be of considerable value around 30 years of age, have 10-12 (65190). Who would better understand

to the process. The person who is go- years time in Service, possess a 7-9 skill needs and requirements of todays Air

ing to operate or maintain a system level in his specialty, acquired more Force mission than NCOs working in

could lend valuable assistance during than a year of college credit, and the trenches7 Maintenance and operthe determination of need, establish- attended several levels of professional ator experience is critically important

ment of the system requirements, military education, in managing acquisition programs. It

prototyping, early testing stages, com- These non-commissioned officers is a proven fact that NCOs are

petition phase, and the all-important could be recruited as volunteers for a qualified to perform various duties

baselining during critical design review new acquisition early-on in the pro- within the acquisition career field now

(CDR). cess. They could fill out an Air Force open only to officers.

Program Manager 45 May-June 1990
Bibliography

1. AFR 36-1 & AFVA 36-1, Officer

Classification Guide, January 1, 1984.

2. AFR 39-1 & AFVA 39-1, Airman

Classification Guide, February 1, 1988.

3. AFR 70-2, AFSC Supplement 1,

"Air Force Procurement Career

Management Program," Contracting

and Acquisition, February 16, 1979.

4. Hirsch, Edward, Brigadier General

USA (Ret.), "DOD's Move to a More

Professional Acquisition Work Force,"

Program Manager, (May-June 1988)

pp. 3-8.

It is not my suggestion to build a Conclusion 5. Hoffman, James E., RMCM USN,

brand new career field for NCOs in ac- "International Is Well NCO Panel At DSMC Received," Program Manager,

quisition management. I profess that When one gathers all facts, surely (Nov.-Dec. 1988) pp. 32-33.

a prefix denoting acquisition career history will indicate that the NCO (No -De p. 32M33.

field experience and education would (i.e., users, operators, maintainers) 6. Jones, James W., "The Making of

be sufficient to manage this resource of have been ignored in the acquisition an Acquisition Officer," Government

personnel. To aid in the selection, the process from the beginning. It is ap- Executive, (Nov.-Dec. 1987) pp. 22-26.

Manpower Personnel Center (MPC) parent that it is a career field for 7. Lohmeyer, Dan, Major USAF,

would keep records on individuals officers. There have been token "Acquisition Manager Career Develwith this prefix and would file infor- gestures to include the NCO in the ac- opment Initiatives," Program

mation like military training, formal quisition process. Anyone doing fact- Manager, (July-August 1986) pp.

education, system experience, profes- finding on acquisition management 21-23.

sional military education, and com- can tell that additional personnel are 8. Mcllvaine, Paul J., "Defense

mand and staff experience. needed in the acquisition process. It is Needs More Engineering," Program

Panel at DSMC clear that NCOs have a valid input to Manager, (May-June 1987) pp. 24-29

Recently, several senior NCOs met the process. I feel the solution to the 9. Musgrove, Colonel USAF, "Overat the Defense System Management problem is clear and simple: employ view of Logistics," Lecture at SNCOA, College (DSMC) to address issues for NCOs in the acquisition process from . U the beginning. For this solution to be Air University, February 1989. Fact

present and future program managers effective all user and procuring com- sheet, USAF 85-27 "Air Force Relifrom the customer's viewpoint. First mands must support this solution. ability and Maintainability Program

and foremost we need to really listen (R&M 2000)," 1985.

to people operating, repairing and I do not profess sweeping changes to 10. Olsen, Paul 0., Captain USAF,

Weineeto .Sedu tieand bets 'include the non-commissioned officer Acquisition and Retention of Scientific money to get key people out of the of- in the acquisition management career and Engineering Personnel, Squadron ice and into the field. A senior enlisted field, nor are any needed. Implemen- Officers School, Air University, billet shifted from operational forces to tation of this solution would be November 25, 1963. aillet prog m fr oeo m ores t p relatively simple by just adding 11. Randolph, Bernard P., Lieutenant foprogram office could more than pay another prefix. For this solution to be General USAF, "How to Buy a on experience in the development of effective the user must be committed Weapon," Airman, (September 1986) new or improved systems and equip- to the idea of procuring a weapons pp. 30-33.

ment. This was the opinion of the system that is cost effective, within 12. Smith, William D., Colonel

panel made up of 5 senior NCOs. schedule, state-of-the-art and, fore- USAF, The Impact of the Packard most, maintainable and operable. The Commission Report within USAFand

To ensure that NCOs perform and NCOs do have something to con- DOD, Air War College, Air Universiprogress at a high level of proficiency tribute to the acquisition career field. ty, May 1987, and A Quest for Exonce in the acquisition career field, a If properly picked, trained and cellence, President's Blue Ribbon Coinmodel program could be developed for assigned they would and could func- mission, June 1986.

them like that used for officers and tion in a highly professional manner.

civilians in acquisition management.

The AFSC has a system in effect, AFR Involving the user early-on in the ac- Senior Mastr Sereant Hitz serivs as a

70-2, AFSC Sup 1. This "mirrored" quisition process is smart business. Param Manaqer, Memory U&de

system could cover new NCOs in the Utilizing the non-commissioned officer ((X-2E), A WA (. System Progprm Of'

acquisition career field and the few in the acquisition process is even ice, C3 System, Hanscom Air Force Base,

already in place. smarter. Massachusetts.

Program Manager 46 May-June 1990
ACKER/AINSLEY

(Continued firm paje 15)

to anticipated questions or statements.

Using computers to instruct demands , ,**,

time for analysis and design of the . lesson. The subject-matter expert and . --

computer programmer painstakingly - - /

define objectives, content, and possible alternative tracks to students' Office of the Commandant ........................ (703) 664-6323

responses during the lesson.

If we put this thought together with Office of the Provost ............................. (703) 664-6325

the absence of inhibitions mentioned

previously, people communicating by Center for Acquisition Management Policy .......... (703) 664-1185

computer with superiors may send

copies to people they would not ordi- Acquisition Enhancement Program Office ........... (703) 664-2457

narily contact. Thus, the communication process is broadened. Executive Institute ............................... (703) 664-5979

Final Thoughts School of Systems Acquisition Education .......... (703) 664-5173

We would be remiss to discuss communication today without discussing Department of Research and Information ........... (703) 664-2289

technologies. It is important to note

that technologies discussed here are Department of College Operations and Services . (703) 664-1084

only tools or devices to enhance or improve communications. Foundations Administration and Personnel Services Directorate... (703) 664-1175

and principles governing effective

communication must be present Office of the Registrr ............................ (703) 664-2152

whether or not we use technology.

Effective communication will not oc- Publications Directorate .......................... (703) 664-5082

cur because we use the telephone or

watch television; we must remember

we are only using a different medium *NOh: Autovon prefix for all numbers above is 354.

to send or receive a message. Communication is a complex two-way process, which requires a message, Eastern Region .................................. (617) 377-3593

transmitter, medium, receiver and AV 478-3593

feedback. Efficient application of

writing, speaking, listening, reading Southern Region ......................... (205) 876-2730

and questioning skills are critical.

The synergism of communication AV 876-2730

skills, technology and the human

creative spirit can impact positively the Central Region .................................. (314) 263-1142

effectiveness of our information AV 693-1142

transmittal. This is increasingly evident as society grows in knowledge Wetern Resion .................................. (213) 643-1159

and recognizes problems demanding

better ways to communicate. AV 833-1159

Professor Acker is a senior member of the

Research Dirertorate staff and Dr. Ainslev

is a Professor of Educational Technoklog,

Fducation Research DiNrectorate, Department of Research and Information, Defense

Sytems Management Coleyt. Much

material in this artice will be in the second

edition of Profsswr Acker's book Skill in

0ommunication: A Vital Element in

Etective Management planned for

publication this yrar. See article "Skill in

Communication.: Something Every

Manapr Shouki Posses, "in this Pr(gram

Manager for deiils.

Program Manager 47 May-June 1990
ACQUIRING MAJOR SYSTEMS CONTRACTS:

Bidding Methods and Winning Strategies.

Marshall H. Kaplan

(Wiley Interscience. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York,

1988. 233 pp.)

T ihe secret to winning is not los- One reason the book complements Without descending into cynicism,

ing, according to Marshall tools usually available to government Dr, Kaplan presents an honest and

Kaplan, in closing his fast-paced, in- acquisition professionals is that Dr. frank account of the importance of

formative, hands-on, how-to book Kaplan provides insights into the knowing the customer and the public

that should be in the library of every continuous competition for resources and private agendas that senior inperson whose livelihood depends upon existing within even the largest firms. dividuals in source selection may have.

winning requests for proposals. It Too frequently, it seems, government He points out the extreme importance

should be available to individuals in- rule-setters or special pleaders are of meticulous compliance with all

volved in the generation and scoring oblivious to relationship between their aspects of the RFP and provides formal

of acquisition documents at federal, insatiable appetites for documen- structures within the proposal team to

state, and local government levels. tation and the cost of proposal ensure compliance. He outlines review

This book complements much preparation-resources that come processes and "front-end" processes of

material in the Program Management directly out of corporate profits and evaluating likely competitors. One of

Course at the Defense Systems are not chargeable. Job security for the first things that must be done is to

Management College. The Appendices members of the proposal teams is tied round out capabilities and capacities

provide detailed descriptions of many directly to winning. In the larger sense, with teammates or sub-contractors.

sections of standard RFP and acquisi- corporate survival in this age of austere These suggestions are in "how to"

tion regulations drawn from NASA defense budgets is also tied to forms.

and the Aijp rce that are hardly men- winning. The essence of the message is that

tioned in 4 DOD core courses in Dr. Kaplan uses a hypothetical bid assuming a bidder has a good idea, is

defense systems acquisition. on a very large space program by an strong technically, and can field a

Dr. Kaplan, experienced veteran of equally large vendor (there is an ir- credible management team, then

the proposal generation process, has a resistible temptation to guess which failure to exercise care and discipline

straightforward message to proposal program and which company for the in every aspect of the preparation of

teams of huge aerospace corporations example is a montage from real life), the proposal can only weaken chances

and to small business vendors. It is: Ex- In his narrative of events that must of winning. It is the detailed instrucercise disciplined planning, and leave occur in recruiting the proposal team, tions of how to avoid throwing away

nothing to chance. In the main body securing corporate management ap- advantage that give this book a unique

of his text, he leads the reader through proval to make the bid and securing value. Exhortation is replaced by

step-by-step activities that must occur people and financial resources that will example.

before the formal RFP is issued, and be needed and so on through the entire Dr. Kaplan is an aeronautical

the maelstrom that engulfs the pro- process, Dr. Kaplan provides sample engineer and specialist in space flight

posal team after the formal RFP is organization charts, sample agendas systems. The careful layout of the

received. Dr. Kaplan weaves the story for planning meetings, sample various streams of information that

of the responsibilities of everyone from schedules, etc. He introduces tech- must come together on time and with

corporate management above the pro- niques used to integrate the bid and winning quality reflects the discipline

ject team to artists, production proposal efforts in a complex bid such of science. This book is a distinct conspecialists and word processors. The as the use of themes, storyboards and, tribution to the technology of acquisikey words are commitment, discipline even, conference room walls! tion and is particularly important for

and planning, its concern with technologies that the

Mr. Bottoms is the former Navy Chair, successful bidder must master.

Executive Institute, at the Dfense ystems Management College. He resides in

Sarsota, Fkrida.

Program Manager 48 May-June 1990