Home' Army Acquisition Logistics and Technology Magazine : Army ALT April-June 2011 Contents our programs. The PEOs [program
executive offices] retain the savings so
they can do better things for Soldiers
within their programs," Phillips said.
With these tenets in mind, Phillips
emphasized that the Army needs to
identify executable and affordable
requirements. Along these lines, he
cited the ground combat vehicle
Request for Proposal (RFP) as an
example of how the Army can properly
align and prioritize its requirements.
The RFP called for a "tiering" of
requirements and clear-cut cost goals so
that industry would understand what
was being asked and have the trade
space necessary to fashion technologi-
cally mature solutions that can meet the
requirements outlined in the proposal.
Getting this right calls for proper
collaboration across a range of
stakeholders, Phillips explained.
"We must be output-focused and
resource-informed," he said. "When
we talked about the ground combat
vehicle, this is what we are getting
at. Today, for a major program, the
acquisition folks, the sustainment folks,
and the resourcing people must all be
actively involved and engaged in the
process before we begin to think about
Another possible area of efficiency
centers around looking for potential
collaboration on weapons production
throughout industry and across the
services, Phillips said.
"As we work through the efficiencies
with OSD [the Office of the Secretary
of Defense], it's important that we
work with our industry partners.
If you look at missiles built by the
Army, Navy, and Air Force, are there
opportunities for the industrial base
or a company to leverage what we do
and gain efficiencies by using the same
Efficiencies in Testing
Testing is another area of potential
efficiencies, Phillips said.
"Test is a critical part of every pro-
gram. We should test to standard. We
shouldn't over-test, but we shouldn't
under-test either. There is a balance
when it comes to making sure that you
have a viable program that is going
through the right testing procedures to
validate that the systems you're fielding
are safe and suitable," Phillips said.
The drive to achieve efficiencies is
not intended to reduce industry
profits but rather to create incentives
and motivation for greater industry
productivity, panelists said.
"I don't see efficiency initiatives and
profits being mutually exclusive," said
Steve Zink, Vice President, Oshkosh
Defense Strategy and Planning.
"It's achievable to think we can
achieve a win-win," said Mick Maurer,
President of Sikorsky Military Systems.
Council Gets Underway
In a related development, senior
U.S. Army Contracting Command
(ACC) leaders and a group of industry
representatives came together on Feb.
24 at ACC headquarters at Fort Belvoir,
VA, for the first meeting of the ACC
Industry Executive Council. The coun-
cil is a forum to exchange information,
identify common issues, build partner-
ships, and develop solutions that will
improve Army contracting.
"We have been planning this for over a
year, and now it aligns very nicely with
DOD's recent Better Buying Power
Initiatives," said Jeff Parsons, ACC's
Executive Director. "We're here to gain
a common understanding of how we
can work together to face future chal-
lenges, including anticipated cutbacks
in the Army budget."
In addition to these DOD initiatives,
the attendees discussed a recent Office
of Management and Budget "Myth
Busting" memorandum, which rec-
ommends that "each agency develop
a high-level vendor communication
plan." The establishment of ACC's
Executive Industry Council is a step
in that direction, according to a state-
ment from ACC.
KRIS OSBORN is a Highly Qualified
Expert for the ASAALT Office of
Strategic Communications. He holds a
B.A. in English and political science from
Kenyon College and an M.A. in compar-
ative literature from Columbia University.
Testing is an area where potential economic efficiencies can be gained. Here, the Joint Light Tactical
Vehicle undergoes a dirt track test at the Churchville Test Area near Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, June 3,
2010. (U.S. Army photo by David McNally, U.S. Army Research, Development, and Engineering Command
56 APRIL--JUNE 2011
Links Archive Army ALT July-September 2011 Army ALT January-March 2011 Navigation Previous Page Next Page