Executive Agency Rapid Improvement Team Executive Briefing Report

Executive Agency Rapid Improvement Team Executive Briefing Report on Findings and Recommendations May 18, 2001

Agenda I. Background and Charter Review II. Summary Findings III. Proposed Model for Improving Executive Agent “Return on Assignment” IV. Rapid Implementation Plan V. 3/18/2018 Executive Support Required 1

Why This Executive Agent RIT? 1. Sharing and leveraging resources across all boundaries has become a strategic imperative for Do. D. 2. Use of Executive Agents can reduce unnecessary redundancy and achieve global consistency. 3. Increasingly complex mission requirements coupled with the absence of a clear, Do. D-wide policy and process deployment have exposed the need for reinvention of the Executive Agent role. 4. Promote Jointness across Do. D Components 3/18/2018 2

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: ü Increase end-user satisfaction ü Eliminate redundancy ü Reduce cost of commodities/services ü Increase cooperation and coordination across boundaries 3/18/2018 3

Executive Agent RIT Charter Specific Deliverables 1. Updated definition of the Executive Agent role, responsibilities and relationships. 2. Criteria for designating new Executive Agents and validating existing ones. 3. A roadmap for executing EA responsibilities and determining standards of performance for Executive Agents over their life-cycle. 4. Recommendations for specific Executive Agent assignments to be tested in upcoming FLOW exercises. 3/18/2018 4

Executive Agent RIT Participation Executive Sponsors RIT Champions COL Bob Klass CDR Mike Mc. Peak RIT Participants 3/18/2018 LTG John M. Mc. Duffie MG Daniel G. Mongeon Mr. Louis A. Kratz Ms. Mary Margaret Evans OSD, CINC and Service Representatives, Defense Agencies, and Joint Staff 5

Summary Findings 1. Across Do. D 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. 2. The starting point for improvement is the establishment of a Do. D policy that clearly distinguishes the unique, unduplicable role of Executive Agents as Do. D’s primary resource for fulfilling defined support missions. 3/18/2018 6

Summary Findings (cont. ) 3. To assure credibility and integrity, all Executive Agent assignments must be made based on a rigorous business case analysis. 4. Once designated, Executive Agents must perform against a standard balanced scorecard, whose goals are tailored to defined Executive Agent mission responsibilities. 3/18/2018 7

Summary Findings (cont. ) 5. 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. 6. To ensure the consistent application of the end-to-end Executive Agent process, clear oversight accountability and authority must be assigned to an OSD level EA process owner. 3/18/2018 8

Proposed Executive Agent Definition A Do. D 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. 3/18/2018 9

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. Common tasks where capability to perform mission critical requirements cannot be duplicated without great expense and/or risk. EVERYONE can do it, But only one can coordinate and deliver it better than everyone doing it alone. 3/18/2018 EFFECTIVENESS is defined as: EVERYONE needs it, But one can do it for all at the level of performance required. 10

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 1. End-user satisfaction End-user survey rating actual performance vs. expectations 5. 2. Dollar savings from economies of scale Performance against baseline unit costs 6. 3. Responsiveness to changes in end-user mission required End-user survey rating actual performance vs. expectations 4. 3/18/2018 Reduction in Performance support footprint against baseline footprint 7. Single point of contact for all communication Provision of continuous, sustainable and global support as required Metric End-user survey rating actual performance vs. expectations Robustness of plans and facilities as rated by end-user Ability to Actual end-user anticipate mission needs and match accomplishment with optimal scored resource response vs targets. 11

Disciplined End-to-End Executive Agent Process Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Identify and evaluate EA opportunities Perform Business Case Analysis Make the Decision to Assign or Decline Communicate the Decision and Educate on the Impact Reevaluate or seek other options Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Resource the EA and Prepare to Execute the EA Assignment Conduct Formal Periodic EA Performance Evaluations Make the Decision to Reassign or Divest Restart the process as appropriate 3/18/2018 A Roadmap for ensuring a high return on every Executive Agent Assignment 12

Cross-functional Process Involvements Secretary of Defense Makes final decisions to assign and divest Funding Authority Ensures timely budget allocation Legal Authority Support policy, contract compliance without hindering performance 3/18/2018 EA Process Owner Oversees end-to-end process Executive Agent Provider(s) Performs to levels contracted, continuously seek improvement Subject Matter Expert Brings forward EA opportunities and assists in business case analysis End User Provides accurate requirements, timely feedback, cooperative problem-solving 13

Model for Improving Executive Agent Performance Consensus Definition and Selection Criteria Balanced Scorecard Clear, value-added and unchallenged Standard goal categories and metrics Disciplined End-to-End process Supporting Infrastructure 3/18/2018 Defined roles and rules of engagement Resources, systems and expertise 14

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. 3/18/2018 15

Executive Action Requested The Executive Sponsors: 1. Work together to identify the Executive Agency process owner which will: a) Guide the new EA policy and process to SECDEF b) Provide oversight of the end-to-end executive agent process 2. Approve the action plan. 3. Assure funding to launch and support four action teams to execute the rapid implementation plan. a) Action Items 1, 3, 4, - CMC funded b) Action item 2 – FLOW/AI Pillar resourced 3/18/2018 J 4 takes the lead on communicating the case for change to the CINCs and Services. 16

Proposed Logistics Designated EAs for FLOW § § § 3/18/2018 Barrier / Construction Material - Navy Medical Supplies - DLA Bulk Fuel - DLA Rations to include Bottled Water - DLA Ground Transportation in Theatre - Army Water - Army 17