Executive Agency Rapid Improvement Team Executive Briefing

1. Executive Agency Rapid Improvement TeamExecutive Briefing Report on Findings and RecommendationsMay 18, 2001

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

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

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

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

6. Executive Sponsors LTG John M. McDuffie MG Daniel G. Mongeon Mr. Louis A. Kratz Ms.Mary Margaret Evans Executive Agent RIT Participation RITChampions COL Bob Klass CDR Mike McPeak RITParticipants OSD, CINC and Service Representatives, Defense Agencies, and Joint Staff

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

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

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

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

11. Criteria for Executive Agent Assignment All Executive Agent assignments must be based on a rigorous business case analysis that demonstrates the potential for delivering better performance through improved efficiency or effectiveness, or both. EFFICIENCY is defined as: Common tasks where economies of scale in providing goods/ services can only be accomplished through assignment of a single point of responsibility and authority. EVERYONE can do it,But only one can coordinate and deliver it better than everyone doing it alone. EFFECTIVENESS is defined as: Common tasks where capability to perform mission critical requirements cannot be duplicated without great expense and/or risk. EVERYONE needs it,But one can do it for all at the level of performance required.

12. Executive Agent Balanced Scorecard All Executive Agents will be accountable for achieving stated, agreed upon goals tailored to their specific mission needs on seven performance areas. Goal Metric Goal Metric End-user surveyrating actualperformance vs.expectations 5. Single pointof contact forallcommunication End-user surveyrating actualperformance vs.expectations • End-usersatisfaction 6. Provision ofcontinuous,sustainable andglobal supportas required Robustness ofplans and facilities as rated by end-user • Dollar savingsfrom economiesof scale Performanceagainst baselineunit costs • Responsivenessto changes inend-usermission required End-user surveyrating actualperformance vs.expectations 7. Ability toanticipateneeds and matchwith optimalresource response Actual end-usermissionaccomplishment scored vs targets. • Reduction insupport footprint Performanceagainst baselinefootprint

13. Disciplined End-to-End Executive Agent Process Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Identify andevaluateEA opportunities PerformBusiness Case Analysis Make the Decisionto Assign orDecline Communicate theDecision andEducate on the Impact Reevaluate or seek other options Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Resource the EAand Prepare toExecute Execute theEAAssignment Conduct FormalPeriodic EAPerformanceEvaluations Make the Decisionto Reassignor Divest Restart the process as appropriate A Roadmap for ensuring a high return on everyExecutive Agent Assignment

14. Secretary of Defense EA Process Owner Makes final decisionsto assign and divest Oversees end-to-end process Funding Authority Ensures timelybudget allocation Executive Agent Legal Authority Support policy,contract compliancewithout hinderingperformance End User Provides accuraterequirements, timelyfeedback, cooperativeproblem-solving Provider(s) Performs to levelscontracted, continuouslyseek improvement Cross-functional Process Involvements Subject Matter Expert Brings forward EAopportunities andassists in businesscase analysis

15. Model for Improving Executive Agent Performance Clear, value-addedand unchallenged ConsensusDefinition andSelection Criteria Standard goalcategories andmetrics BalancedScorecard Defined rolesand rules ofengagement Disciplined End-to-Endprocess Resources,systemsand expertise Supporting Infrastructure

16. Rapid Implementation Plan(Establish Four Action Teams) Team 1 - Develop required policy documents. Team 2 - Validate proposed EA process, roles and responsibilities in FLOW. Team 3 - Develop a communications plan to secure “buy in” from all key stakeholders. Team 4 - Design supporting process tools (e.g. templates for business case analysis, etc.), and identify potential new EA assignments with a projection of expected benefits.

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

18. Proposed Logistics Designated EAs for FLOW • Barrier / Construction Material - Navy • Medical Supplies - DLA • Bulk Fuel - DLA • Rations to include Bottled Water - DLA • Ground Transportation in Theatre - Army • Water - Army