7 D-RI92 623 TRAINING APPROACHES IN AFC (AIR FORCE

LOGISTICS /

COMMAND) PROCUREMENT(U) AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLU MC Si I MAXWIELL AFB AL T E DORING APR 88 ACSC-88-8765

UNCLASSIFIED F/G 5/5 U

uII

132r

4 'SLAG

* J..

V. 1&0

IIIJIL2fllIV-

AD-~92623

AIR COMMANDAND

I STAFF COLLEGE

STUDENT REPORT

[TRAINING APPROACHES

IN AFLC PROCUREMENT

MR. THOMAS E. DORING 88-0765

"nsights into tomorrow".-

AAI

ELET

TI rs &=~mt 3 ' ;r

%. % 4a . ,

DISCLAIMER

The views and conclusions expressed in thisdocument are those of the author. They arenot intended and should not be thought torepresent official ideas, attitudes, orpolicies of any agency of the United StatesGovernment. The author has not had specialaccess to official information or ideas andhas employed only open-source materialavailable to any writer on this subject.

This document is the property of the UnitedStates Government. It is available fordistribution to the general public. A loancopy of the document may be obtained from theAir University Interlibrary Loan Service(AUL/LDEX, Maxwell AFB, Alabama, 36112-5564)or the Defense Technical Information Center.Request must include the author's name andcomplete title of the study.

This document may be reproduced for use inother research reports or educational pursuits

*contingent upon the following stipulations:

- Reproduction rights do not extend toany copyrighted material that may be containedin the research report.

- All reproduced copies must contain thefollowing credit line: "Reprinted bypermission of the Air Command and StaffCollege."

- All reproduced copies must contain thename(s) of the report's author(s).

- If format modification is necessary tobetter serve the user's needs, adjustments maybe made to this report--this authorizationdoes not extend to copyrighted information ormatera-. The following statement mustaccompany the modified document: "Adaptedfrom Air Command and Staff College ResearchReport (number) entitled (title)

by (author)."

- This notice must be included with anyreproduced or adapted portions of thisdocument.

r0Mr -

-I

:REPORT NUMBER 88-0765

I= TITLE TRAINING APPROACHES IN AFLC PROCUREMENT

~AUTHOR(S) MR. THOMAS E. DORING, USAF

FACULTY ADVISOR LT COL MIKE STEWART, ACSC/EDM

SPONSOR MR. JAMES C. BARONE, ES-4, HQ AFLC/PM-2

Submitted to the faculty in partial fulfillment ofrequirements for graduation.

AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGEAIR UNIVERSITY

MAXWELL AFB, AL 36112-5542

00

LUNCLASSIFIED RPR DCM NA O PGSECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE

_REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE o No. 070018I

Ia. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION lb. RESTRICTIVE MARKINGSUNCLASSIFIED

2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 3. DISTRIBUTION /AVAILABILITY OF REPORTSTATEMENT "A"

2b. DECLASSIFICATION/ DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE Approved for public rlease;Distribution is unlimited.

4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) S. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

88-0765

6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 6b. OFFICE SYMBOL 7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATIONI (If applicable)

ACSC/EDC I6c. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 7b. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code)

Maxwell AFB, AL 361125542

Ba. NAME OF FUNDING/SPONSORING Sb. OFFICE SYMBOL 9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBERORGANIZATION (If applicable)

ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS

*PROGRAM IPROJECT ITASK IWORK UNITELEMENT NO. NO. NO ACCESSION NO.

11. TITLE (include Security Classification)

TRAINING APPROACHES IN AFLC PROCUREMENT

12. PERSONAL AUTHOR(S)

Doring, Thomas E., GS-13, USAF13a. TYPE OF REPORT j13b. TIME COVERED 14. DATE OF REPORT (Year, Month, Day) IS. PAGE COUNT

I FROM TO 1988 April 1916. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION

17. COSATI CODES 18. SUBJECT TERMS (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)

FIELD GROUP SUB-GROUP

19. ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)

[* This report examines the current training approaches AFLC/PM uses for policyissuance, and establishes the inability of existing methods to accomodatemassive amounts of policy change. Alternatives are reviewed, and recommendationsprovided to alleviate the problem.

,a'

"4'.

20- DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT 21. ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION0_3 UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED 6 SAME AS RPT. Q OTIC USERS UNCLASSIFIED

22a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 22b. TELEPHONE (include Area Code) 22c. OFFICE SYMBOLACSC/EDC Maxwell AFB AL 36112-5542 (205) 293-28670 DD Form 1473, JUN 86 Previous editions are obsolete. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE

UNCLASSIFIED."

-,, ' w , , - . . " , . . , , " . . , . ; . " , ,, " , " . . .. , " ", " " " " ; " . " . " . ,. " , , , ",%, , ." " " "e , , .

PREFACE

Learning takes time, and time costs money.Whenever change is introduced to a system, somelevel of learning is required. Large amounts ofchange generally necessitate more learning, andtherefore require more time at a higher cost thansmaller amounts of change. The purpose of thisproject is to recommend ways for the system (inthis case, acquisition in the Air Force LogisticsCommand) to more easily adopt a large amount of

K: policy change.

The author wishes to express his appreciationto those who helped in preparing this project:first, to his wife, Susan, and their children,Kelly and Steven, for the support andunderstanding they provided throughout thisendeavor; also, Lt Col Mike Stewart, faculty

* advisor, for his advice and assistance.

Accession For

NTIS GRA&IDTIC TABunannounced ElJustiffication

By. ".Dist ribiit ion/.. .f ,o,

AvailabllitY Codes 4V00V-Av: iI and/or Opic

Dist Spucial

*I

O°,iii

.4

-ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Mister Doring began his Federal civil servicecareer as a contract negotiator at San Antonio AirLogistics Center in 1973. Over the next six years,he performed various contracting-related duties.His selection and subsequent training in the AirForce COPPER CAP training program provided aneducation in the other primary logisticsdisciplines (Comptroller, Distribution,Maintenance, Material Management) . In 1979, hemoved to Dayton, Ohio to become a staff member forthe Deputy Chief of Staff/Contracting andManufacturing, Headquarters, Air Force LogisticsCommand, located at Wright-Patterson Air ForceBase, Ohio. After four years as the seniorprocurement analyst in the Contracting DataSystems Division, he transferred to the Plans andResources Division to work on manpower and budgetissues. In 1985, he accepted his current

* assignment to a newly created position in theLogistics Contracting Policy Division. This jobwas created to analyze acquisition relatedlegislative proposals for their potential impacton Air Force Logistics Command. 'His assessmentsare regularly provided to the AFLC Commander, andwere even presented to the President's Blue RibbonCommission on Defense Management in 1985.

Mister Doring graduated from the StateUniversity of New York at Binghamton in 1974 witha Bachelor of Arts in Business Enterprise, andfrom the University of Texas at San Antonio in1979 with a Masters in Business Administration. In1987, he was selected as one of five civilians toattend the Air Command and Staff College fromindividuals nominated throughout the Air Force.

Mister Doring is married to the former SusanGold. They have two children, Kelly and Steven.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface................................................. iii

About the Author........................................ iv

Table of Contents........................................ v

List of Illustrations................................... vi

Executive Summary...................................... vii

CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION............................. 1

4CHAPTER TWO -- OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW OF AFLC/PM..........3

CHAPTER THREE -- AFLC/PM TRAINING APPROACHES............7

CHAPTER FOUR - ALTERNATIVES........................... 11

CHAPTER FIVEConclusions........................................15sRecommendations.................................... 15

* BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................ 17

v

Irs'M11

. , - : , ,7 _ | _ .... .. ... .

:__ LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

FIGURES

Figure 1 -- AFLC/PM Organizational Chart .............. 3

Figure 2 -- Typical ALC/PM OrganizationalChart ................................. 5

TABLE

Table 1 -- FY87 Central Contracting ManpowerAllocation Summary.......................4

vi

lSt

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYPart of our College mission is distribution of thestudents' problem solving products to DoDsponsors and other interested agencies toenhance insight into contemporary, defense

.... related issues. While the College has accepted thisproduct as meeting academic requirements for

00 graduation, the views and opinions expressed or4 9 WAN implied are solely those of the authot and should

not be construed as carrying official sanction.

-"insights into tomorrow"

REPORT NUMBER 88-0765

AUTHOR(S) MR. THOMAS E. DORING

TITLE TRAINING APPROACHES IN AFLC PROCUREMENT

I. Problem: The Deputy Chief of Staff, Contracting andManufacturing, Air Force Logistics Command, accomplishesnecessary training of its personnel under normal conditions.However, no satisfactory approach is available for thosecircumstances which require providing a large amount ofpolicy training to a large number of personnel within ashort mandatory time period. Existing approaches cannot meetthis requirement.

II. Objective: Recommend a possible approach for thetraining problem faced when a large amount of policy changemust be provided to a large number of personnel within ashort time.

III. Discussion of Analysis: Existing training approaches.A-* used by AFLC/PM can accomodate training for either small

amounts of policy change to large audiences, or largeamounts of policy change training for small, selectivetarget audiences. Extensive time delays have been

vii

O.o rR;, - .

CONTINUED

experienced when a large amount of policy change requirestraining of a large number of personnel. These time delayscan be expressed in costs by examining the increasedpipeline time needed for award of contractual actions.

IV. Findings: Existing approaches cannot be modified tomeet the requirement.

V. Recommendations: The newly installed videoteleconferencing network can be used to overcome theshortfalls associated with existing training approaches, andis not subject to the problems experienced with previousattempts to meet the requirement of many changes and largeaudiences.

viii

Chapter One

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this project is to recommend way(s) tosave time in implementing many policy changes. Learningtakes time, and time costs money. In any large corporatestructure whenever a policy change is injected into thesystem, a certain amount of time transpires before the newpolicy is assimilated into all facets of the corporation.Massive changes generally take longer to incorporate than dominor changes due to the span of control and the degree ofreeducation. A minor change may only have a localized orlimited application. This project examines if procurementpersonnel in the Air Force Logistics Command (AFLC) can bemore effective in their capability to incorporate policychanges into the acquisition process. Specifically,recommendations for a more tailored training approach will

4 be offered.

. This report reviews the scope of responsibilitiesperformed by AFLC procurement personnel, examiningstatistical data including AFLC sites; number of personnel;management structure; number of contracts issued; amount ofdollars obligated; estimated costs involved in adding onemore day to the pipeline for all AFLC due-in assets.jThisknowledge baseline provides the reader an understanding forthe importance of the recommendations in the study. Otherstudies such as Procurement Leadtime: The Forgotten Factor(4:--) have been performed or are underway to discover ideasfor reducing lead time throughout the entire spectrum of theacquisition system as it currently operates.

This report next examines how AFLC/PM currently handlestraining requirements. Because this approach is structuredtoward planned requirements, it cannot accomodate timesensitive changes for mass audiences. An examination of thetraining approaches employed by AFLC/PM to implement twofairly recent massive changes (the Federal Acquisition

96 .1

.' . 4 l e G :

%- - --. - - - r-

Regulation (FAR) in 1984 and the Competition in ContractingAct (CICA) in 1985) follows, along with the problems,shortcomings, and successes associated with these efforts.

Following a discussion of some alternatives i.: ChapterFour, Conclusions and Recommendations are presented. i,- thefinal chapter.

A 2

' %%

<-'.7-

,4

Chapter Two

OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW OF AFLC/PM

*Before the reader can understand the magnitude of thetask facing AFLC/PM management when confronted with largestatutory or executive policy mandates to be injected intothe AFLC acquisition process, the reader must firstcomprehend the size and structure of the AFLC procurementoperation. AFLC/PM headquarters, consisting of approximatelyone hundred personnel, is located at Wright-Patterson AFB,OH. Figure 1 (7:--) contains an organizational chart whichillustrates the management structure of HQ AFLC/PM.

[PB PMMP i PMXPPMA PMPO 1 PMXA

PMMP PMPL PMXP

PO PMXL

Figure 1. - AFLC/PM Organizational Chart

These personnel have many varied responsibilities, but amajority of them are policymakers on such diverse areas asdata system planning and design; proper use of multiple-yearcontract instruments; formula and forward pricing agreementconsiderations; manpower requirements projection adjustmentfactors; Industrial Modernization Improvement Program.

.3

0

There is no actual buying performed by headquarterspersonnel. The buying functions are performed by thefollowing field activities: Sacramento ALC (SM-ALC),McClellan AFB, CA; Warner Robins ALC (WR-ALC), Robins AFB,GA; Aerospace Guidance and Metrology Center (AGMC), NewarkAir Force Station, OH; Wright-Patterson Contracting Center(WPCC), Wright Patterson AFB, OH; Oklahoma City ALC(OC-ALC), Tinker AFB, OK; San Antonio ALC (SA-ALC), KellyAFB, TX; Ogden ALC (OO-ALC), Hill AFB, UT. Table 1 displaysthese sites with the number of personnel allocated by HQAFLC/PM to perform central contracting functions against thesites central contracting projected workload (16:--).

Activity Allocation

AGMC 5OC-ALC 591OO-ALC 470SA-ALC 766SM-ALC 393WR-ALC 626WPCC 175

Table 1. - FY87 Central Contracting Manpower Allocation

Summary

As shown in Table 1, there is quite a diverse dispersementof available manpower. These numbers do not reflect the

additional personnel at each site performing basecontracting functions. Although the headquarters staff haspolicy responsibility for base contracting, it cannotinfluence the allocation of personnel to accomplish the basecontracting workloads. The base commander at eachindividual site exercises control over that allocation.Therefore, the statistics displayed specifically excludebase contracting contributions.

4

01 .1

~Although some variations have been authorized and do' ' exist, Figure 2 reflects a 'typical' field activity,'-',organizational structure (8:--).

~Figure 2. - Typical ALC/PM Organizational Chart

i-" In FY87, AFLC issued approximately 360,000 contractual" instruments, with combined obligations on these contracts

[ totalling over $10.5 billion (14:--). Assuming 251 workdays

' .

a year (365 less weekends and holidays), AFLC/PM averagesmore than 1,400 actions worth nearly $42 million total each

-- iworkday. In the author's opinion, this reflects asubstantial workload, and provides some indication of the

challenge involved in implementing changes, especiallymassive, time sensitive changes.

One final reason to minimize the time needed toincorporate changes into the system is that the costinvolved in increasing the lead time for the total amount ofdue-in assets by one additional day is estimated at $6.5billion (14:--). This is the calculated one-time cost ofadding one more day to the schedules on all of the due-inassets on contract for AFLC.

Based on the above data, the reader can draw threeinferences about AFLC procurement. First, it is a largebusiness. The total AFLC contract dollars, when compared tothe 1986 sales of firms listed in Fortune Magazine's top 500industrial companies, would rank 29th, displacing Goodyear

Tire and Rubber (1:364). Second, timeliness is importantbecause large costs can be incurred. Extending theprocurement leadtime requires a larger budget commitment,without the added benefit of gaining additional supplies orservices. Third, in addition to the time pressures forenacting changes, the problems associated with spatial

barriers also exist. Spatial barriers of time and distanceexist between HQ USAF, HQ AFLC, and the AFLC fieldactivities.

In the next chapter, the methods AFLC currently uses toperform its training functions will be reviewed.

5

.5

-- r

Chapter Three

AFLC/PM TRAINING APPROACHES

In the author's opinion, the current methods AFLC/PMuses to address normal training requirements appear to beadequate. In general, training requirements are identified,the quotas are requested and programmed, and the available

*. '", training slots are filled. If out-of-cycle, that is,unprogrammed training is justified and funding is available,requests are processed to fulfill identified needs. Specific

[O training programs are tailored in response to specificN' needs. After examining the existing programs, the reader

will see that the specific need assessed in this papercannot be satisfied by any of the existing programs or

N approaches.

Several years ago (December 1983), AFLC/PM conductedthe first of what has become an annual training event fortrainee buyers, either newly hired or newly promoted. CalledPACER PRODUCE, the program initiates the new buyer personnelin each of the four required basic procurement courses:Defense Acquisition, Contract Price Analysis, Contract Law,Defense Negotiation Workshop. Initially, these courses wereconducted prior to the students receiving any practicalon-the-job training (OJT) experience. However, after theinitial class of students, some field activities havemodified the approach to provide simultaneous real worldexperience to complement the traditional classroom

•_ instruction. Notwithstanding the approach, the entry levelbuying personnel obtain their mandatory course workload in atimely fashion. The PACER PRODUCE program has been verywell received by management, both within and outside ofAFLC.

In addition to an annual program for new buyingpersonnel, AFLC/PM also conducts a yearly training program

for its senior managers. Each October, a week-long sessionis conducted in a combination lecture/seminar format. Theupper echelon of managers from the field activities and theHeadquarters live together at a conference center in Dayton,Ohio. During this period, the new fiscal year projection is

7

examined, and initiatives, problem areas, ideas, andpotential solutions are exchanged. This enables all theAFLC/PM senior managers to start the fiscal year with acommon, clear understanding of challenges and prioritizedtasks for the year.

While AFLC/PM provides an annual training program forthe new buying personnel and senior managers, other trainingopportunities are also exploited. AFLC/PM actively supportstraining programs run at the Air Force level. These includethe COPPER CAP program for civilians, the Career Broadeningprogram for military, and the Education With Industry (EWI)program for both civilians and military personnel. Becausethese programs are specialized in focus (the target audienceis composed entirely of future managers), a much smaller andmore selective target audience is involved.

All the previously discussed training approachesattempt to fulfill the demands of fairly small, selectiveaudiences. They also each require some amount of time toplan and implement. To effect changes which necessitatereaching a large audience (for example, all buying andsupport personnel) within a short time period, none of theabove approaches are adequate. These needs are currentlymet by such various methods as seminars conducted byProcuring Contracting Officers (PCO), BUYERGRAMS(notifications of updated clause availability as the newclauses are established in our solicitation and contractpreparation system data bases), issuance of current policyinterpretation direction and guidance, and lessons-learnedguidance published as a result of reviews of protest files,audits or Inspector General reports, etc. Each of thesemethods is effective in providing small informationalupdates to large audiences. However, on those occasionswhere a massive amount of change must be parlayed to a largeaudience, normally within a mandatory and unreasonably shorttime frame, additional training methods must be employed.None of the approaches described above is acceptable forthis tasking. The methods used for the selective,specialized audiences can accomodate large amounts of changeand large audiences, but require extensive planning and leadtime. The other approaches can accomodate large audienceswith relatively short preparation time needed, but cannotprovide large amounts of information (change). Two recentlarge scale changes in acquisition policy and procedures(the FAR in 1984, and PL 98-369 (CICA) in 1985)

8

1 1 1 N II 1, 11 1 1 1 1

- - -

required finding and using alternative methods. For each ofthese efforts, briefing teams comprised of HQ AFLC/PManalysts went to each of the field activities. For the FARtraining, one team was formed and, preceding thefederal-wide required implementation date, spentapproximately one week at each site. All AFLC/PM personnelreceived the briefings which outlined all known changes andprobable impacts. For the CICA training two teams wereformed and each team went to alternate field activities.This time, in addition to all AFLC/PM personnel, thehigher-level management in both the ALC/AC (Comptroller) andALC/MM (Material Management) directorates were also briefedon the known changes and probable impacts.

* Several problems were inherent in both of theseendeavors. The mobi'lity of the briefing teams, required to

-. meet the mandatory implementation schedules imposed by theOffice of Management and Budget (OMB) for the FAR andCongress for CICA, severely limited the opportunities fortwo-way discussions. Additionally, early issues raisedcould be addressed with subsequent audiences, but questionsposed by later audiences (at the same or subsequent sites)could not be relayed back to previously briefed groups orsites. Finally, the briefers were hampered by incompleteknowledge of all details of the subject matter, a problemcreated by the Department of Defense's (DOD) refusal orinability to make all the changes within the imposedtimetable. For example, FAR implementation was effectedwithout the required new forms prescribed for use in allsolicitations and contracts issued after the mandatoryimplementation date. The protest provisions contained inCICA were initially rejected by DOD until questions ofConstitutional legality raised by the Department of Justicewere resolved.

Notwithstanding these limitations, both efforts wererelatively successful. The initial planning and developmentefforts of the AFLC/PM data laboratory in updating thesoftware and the solicitation and contract clause data basesenabled each of AFLC's sites to load and test the newrequirements levied by the changes prior to the actualimplementation dates. Unfortunately, the massive amount ofchanges injected into the acquisition process by theseevents ensured that initial training would be insufficient,and additional training (for example, OJT or trial an4error) would be necessary. Also, publication and

I,, 9

I06IIIIII afm m n

distribution of supplemental regulatory guidance requiredfrom the DOD and Air Force levels was late. This compoundedthe problems for follow-on training and extended the timeneeded for the users to assimilate all the new requirements.

Alternatives in the next chapter provide insight intohow AFLC/PM can best overcome this problem of providinglarge amounts of training to massive audiences within a veryshort time period.

'10

Chapter Four

-A

ALTERNATIVES

Having examined both current training approaches andprevious methods for integrating massive changes, a reviewof new alternatives is timely. This chapter identifies andexplains five alternatives. Recommendations are saved forchapter five. These alternatives are not presented in anyprioritized order.

One alternative is to do nothing. This alternative*relies on existing approaches to cope with normal

(programmable) training needs. This also presumes nomassive changes for which there is a need to reach largeaudiences are forthcoming. This 'crapshoot' attitude ignoresthe function of Congress (to promote change via newlegislation). Although there have been several suggestionsby respected authorities to decelerate or stop legislatingchanges to acquisition, this issue has not been universallyembraced by the legislators.

What may not be so obvious is to slowthe pace of legislated changes inacquisition management. In the last twoor three years there has been reallythoroughgoing organizational policy andregulatory changes. And we probablyneed some time now to understand andassimilate the changes, and for theresults to be assessed (13:82-83).

Indeed, AFLC/PM itself initiated a Legislative Agenda(desired changes to existing acquisition-related statutesare identified to Congressional staff members for theirfavorable consideration). This Legislative Agenda has alsobeen reviewed and endorsed (with minor changes) by relevantoffices in SAF/AQ, SAF/LL, and OSD. Although thisalternative ignores the problem rather than attempting tofix it, one benefit of the 'do-nothing' alternative is thatit requires no additional resources.

11

*ot

In opposition to doing nothing, several potentialoptions can be considered. To become more proactive tochange, a closer working relationship between AFLC/PManalysts and those in SAF/LL and SAF/AQ responsible forlegislative proposals and analysis could be established.This alternative would require close interpersonalcooperation between the analysts to be successful, and istherefore entirely dependent on the personalities of theinvolved analysts.

Other approaches require encouraging and incorporatingfield activity involvement. This suggestion for field

A activity input and involvement into training updates is nota new, revolutionary idea. Field activity PCOs have avaluable perspective because of their daily interaction with

* the private sector, a viewpoint not shared by Headquartersstaff personnel. Additionally, a prior survey of AFLC/PCOsindicated their desire to provide insight/input to theprocess (10:41). This proposal was also offered forconsideration in an informal conversation with a current PCO(15:--). One other benefit of the field activityinvolvement is that a better appreciation for the impact(s)of the changes can be assessed.

% deAFLC/MM currently uses this approach. However, their% use is limited in development. HQ AFLC/MM assigns subject

areas to each field activity, and these sites develop OJTtraining programs for their assigned blocks ofresponsibility. This approach retains a centralizedauthority for the training material updates, but does it ina manner disbursed from the headquarters (9:--). However,the author believes this approach (as used by AFLC/NM) isonly viable for small amounts of change within well-definedareas of expertise.

Of the approaches discussed in chapter three, a furtherexamination of those current training approaches which canprovide information to large audiences within short timeperiods is necessary. The problem which must be resolvedwith these approaches revolves around the need to providelarge amounts of diverse information. The use of PCO-ledseminars would undertake a two-tiered cadre trainingapproach, which is impracticle and time-consuming. The useof BUYERGRAMS or policy letters would require reducing allchanges to finite, written form. For a large amount ofchange, these approaches are also considered impractical.

12

JOne potential alternative for consideration is to adapttechnology to the problem. Because AFLC/PM is currently inthe second of a three-phased major data system replacementprogram, and the requirements baseline for the system hasbeen firmly established in the contractor's developmentalstatement of work, additional requirements (for example,

Nvideo capability) could not be easily incorporated into thecurrent revision effort. An alternative system would beneeded to meet this demand in the near-term (until thefunding could be made available for the desired audio and/orvideo capability). Furtunately, AFLC has an existing audioand video teleconferencing network which could accomodatethis approach with all field activities except AGMC(3:42).

13

Chapter Five

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CONCLUSIONS

This paper examines whether a more effective trainingapproach can be developed enabling AFLC/PM personnel tobetter incorporate large amounts of policy change into theacquisition process in a short time. Three constant factorsmust be addressed under this training approach: a largeaudience will always be involved; a large amount ofinformation will always be involved; the amount of availabletime to accomplish the training and incorporate the changesunder the other existing approaches is insufficient.

The author believes a combination of the availablealternatives could provide the best approach. Thefoundation for the proposed approach requires using theexisting video teleconferencing network.

The facilities are identically equipped withmicrophones, and color video cameras and monitors,which can also transmit graphics and videotapedmaterial. This allows conference participants touse viewgraphs, 35mm slides, ordinary typewrittenmaterial, and videotapes during briefings.

And .., it's possible to videotape theproceedings. ... will eventually give AFLC thecapability to link up with similar systems used byother branches of the armed forces and variousDepartment of Defense agencies (3:42).

RECOMMENDAT IONS

The author believes the AFLC video teleconferencingnetwork is the foundation for the needed approach, as the

15

. combination of audio and video media can be more effective

for learning than any other single communication medium.Learning increases as the number of available related cuesor stimuli increases (11:37). "Multichannel communicationswhich combine words with related or relevent illustrationswill provide the greatest gain because of the summation ofcues between the channels" (11:37). Using the videoteleconferencing network should be the principal avenue to

-' achieve the objective set forth in this paper, as it is theonly way to accomodate two-way communication among allinvolved users. However, this approach could be enhancedwith the simultaneous adoption of two other alternatives:first, establishing a close working relationship betweenAFLC/PM analysts and those in SAF/AQ and SAF/LL; secondly,encouraging and incorporating field activity involvement.For practical purposes, field activity involvement wouldhave to be limited to a few personnel. They should beselected by local management from the ALC/PM officeresponsible for acquisition policy on local issues(normally, the Procurement Committee) (8:1-2).

Adoption of these additional alternatives will provide*several benefits. Earlier detection of potential problems

for AFLC will be possible if SAF/AQ and SAF/LL analysts arekept apprised of AFLC concerns. Earlier detection providesmore analysis and response time. Establishing a networkwith the field activities will enable a better impactassessment of potential changes, and may provideimplementation alternatives which might go undetected by theheadquarters staff.

Finally, establishing this network between SAF/AQ andSAF/LL, HQ AFLC/PM, and the PM field activities prior to thetime when introduction of massive training is againnecessary will provide a smoother transition because theprincipals in the video teleconferencing networkinfrastructure are already in place. That additionalmassive training will continue to be needed is assured, asrecommendations for change continue to be suggested by such

@., diverse and distinguished groups as the Democratic'V Leadership Council (6:--), the Logistics Management

'Institute (4:--), the Center for Strategic and InternationalStudies (2:--), and the President's Blue Ribbon Commission

S on Defense Management (12:--).

5 16A.5

U[ 555

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. REFERENCES CITED

Articles and Periodicals

1. Fortune 500. Fortune, Vol. 115, No. 9 (27 April 1987).

2. Jordon, Amos A., President and Chief Executive Officer,Center for Strategic and International Studies,Georgetown University. "US Defense Acquisition: AProcess in Trouble". Washington, D.C. March 1987.

3. "New Satellite Teleconferencing Network SavesWright-Patterson Money." Huber Heights Courier,2 December 1987.

4. Perry, James H., Inta Silins and Lloyd B. Embry." "Procurement Leadtime: The Forgotten Factor".

Logistics Management Institute, September 1986.

5. Preston, Colleen A. "Congress and the AcquisitionProcess: Some Recommendations for Improvement".National Contract Management Journal, Vol. 20,Summer 1986, Issue 1. pp. 1-2 5 .

6. Robb, Charles S. Chairman, Democratic Leadership Council."Defending America: Building a New Foundation forNational Strength". Washington, D.C. September 1986.

Official Documents

7. Air Force Logistics Command. AFLCR 23-1, Appendix 20.DCS/Contracting and Manufacturing, HQ AFLC.31 January 1986.

8. Air Force Logistics Command. AFLCR 23-40. Organizationand Mission - Field. Directorate of Procurement andProduction, Air Logistics Centers. 16 July 1975.

17

4 ::: 11 1111II'1 '' I i 1 1

%. ~ ~ N T-% .., -,

CONTINUED

9. Air Force Logistics Command. AFLCR 50-12. Training.Logistics Systems Training Program (LSTP).31 July 1985.

Unpublished Materials

10. Cox, Lawrence 0., Major, USAF. "AFLC ContractingOfficers: What They Think About What They Do".Research study prepared at the Air Command and

-. -' Staff College, Air University, Maxwell Air ForceBase, Alabama, 1976.

11. Junkmann, LaVern G., Major, USAF. "A Conceptual Studyof Accelerated Audio-Visual Instruction." Researchstudy prepared at the Air Command and Staff College,Air University, Maxwell Air Force Base,Alabama, 1971.

12. Packard, David., Chairman, President's Blue RibbonCommission on Defense Management. Letter to thePresident of the United States. 10 July 1987.

" 13. Rich, R. Michael D., Vice-President, Rand Corporation.

Testimony before the Subcommittee on Defense Industry

and Technology of the Committee on Armed Services."To Review Department of Defense Implementation ofRecent Changes in Acquisition Policy", 9 April 1987.

Other Sources

14. Bayless, Thomas H. II., GM-14, HQ AFLC/PMXA,Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433. Telecons, 14 and15 January 1988.

15. O'Brian, Elizabeth., GS-12, WR-ALC/PMC, Robins AFB,GA 31098. Telecon, 24 November 1987.

16. Williams, Charlie E., GS-13, HQ AFLC/PMXA,Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433. Telecon,31 August 1987.

18

e

ukiwi",',., 4

',

,.. CONTINUED

B. RELATED SOURCES

Official Documents

Congressional Record. Continuation of House Proceedings of-.V November 17, 1987, Issue No. 184, and Proceedings of

November 18, 1987, Issue No. 185. Vol. 133, No. 185.18 November 1987. (DOD Authorization Bill).

.19

111 Ilk

DI'

t o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,

-r%..%5-f