Post on 14-May-2020
Ver 3
NATO Unclassified 1
5 Nov 2010
Resourcing & Implementing AOM Capabilities
Mr Stephen Pearce NATO IS – NATO HQ - NOR Colonel Martin FENN GBR Army - SHAPE
NATO Office of Resources
Bureau OTAN des Ressources
Ver 3
NATO Unclassified 2
Resourcing & Implementing AOM(1) Capabilities
• AOM resource demands – now and in the future
• Delivering (and sustaining) Operational Capability to AOM
• Can NATO do better?
1. Alliance Operations & Missions (AOM)
NATO Office of Resources
Bureau OTAN des Ressources
Ver 3
NATO Support to the African Union
ISAF
Support to EU Operation ALTHEA
KFOR
Balkans Defense Reform
Operation ACTIVE
ENDEAVOR
Air Policing
NATO Training
Mission - Iraq
Counter - Piracy
AOM Resource Demands - NATO Operations
NATO Office of Resources
Bureau OTAN des Ressources
Ver 3
NATO Unclassified 4
AOM Resource Demands
AOM - Annual NSIP Authorisations
NATO Office of Resources
Bureau OTAN des Ressources
Ver 3
NATO Unclassified 5
AOM Resource Demands – Current levels of funding
AOM - Annual Military Budget Funding
NATO Office of Resources
Bureau OTAN des Ressources
Ver 3
NATO Unclassified 6
AOM Resource Demands – forecasting the future
• Planning & forecasting future capability shortfalls and resource implications – AOM Requirements & Resources Plans (ARRPs)
ARRP Forecast
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
NSIP €297M* €310M €134M €39M €29M
MB €154M €177M €189M €114M €117M * Actual NSIP expenditure in 2011 anticipated at EUR 150M due to implementation capacity constraints
Uncertainty increases with time
ISAF ARRP Joint Enterprise ARRP
OAE ARRP NTM-I ARRP
Ocean Shield ARRP NATO Support to African Union ARRP
NATO Office of Resources
Bureau OTAN des Ressources
Ver 3
NATO Unclassified 7
Delivering Operational Capability to AOM
• Underpinned by NATO common funding principles • Eligibility criteria and exceptions • Minimum military requirement • Outsourcing vice force generation • Role of the NATO Agencies • Successes!
NATO Office of Resources
Bureau OTAN des Ressources
Ver 3
NATO Unclassified 8
Delivering Operational Capability to AOM
• Some shortcomings of current processes: – Lack of overarching governance & accountability – Seen by the user as too slow and unresponsive to needs – Investment decisions too focused on capital cost – Accuracy of forecasting and estimating of costs – Management (throughout lifecycle) of Requirements is weak – Too much duplication of effort – Absence of effective control on project Implementation – Need to improve Sustainment planning (O&M)
Still fit for purpose in 2010?
NATO Office of Resources
Bureau OTAN des Ressources
Ver 3
NATO Unclassified 9
Can NATO do better?
• Implement governance framework and accountability • Continue to improve planning & forecasting for AOM • Introduce greater control to capability implementation • Improve management of capabilities throughout lifecycle • Avoid duplication of effort • Exploit synergies; including links to CPs (via ACT) • Learn from experience and implement change
– Common Logistic Support
• Greater focus on meeting the needs of the Operational Commander
Requires leadership, trust & teamwork
NATO Office of Resources
Bureau OTAN des Ressources
Ver 3
Questions? NATO Office of Resources
Bureau OTAN des Ressources