OIF validates installation management concept
Army News Service
Release Date: 10/21/2003
By Beau Whittington
WASHINGTON (Army News Service, Oct. 21, 2003) - Operation Iraqi Freedom has proven naysayers wrong about the Installation Management Agency's value, says Maj. Gen. Anders B. Aadland.
Aadland, the agency commander, admits even he wasn't sure the centralization was such a good idea when he heard the initial announcement of the plan to manage base operations funds from Washington.
Little did he know he would become the first director.
"I learned early on the goodness of the initiative was not obvious," Aadland said about his first days in his new job. "It wasn't something everybody was going to rejoice over."
Whether commanders rejoiced, or not, the Army had made a profound decision about the new direction and it was Aadland's job to put the plan in action.
The agency opened its door Oct. 1, 2002, with what the commander describes, "as about a 75 percent solution - not totally ready, not totally staffed." While it was a project in development, then Army Secretary Thomas White didn't want it to become just another idea that got put on the shelf.
"Let's grab this thing and go," White told Aadland and his key staff.
Not fully staffed, or funded, the leaders took what people and money they had to work around a few corners their first fiscal year and clean up the process when the agency becomes fully funded in fiscal 2004.
They knew they could find the answers in a "best case scenario." But, what if there was a war? What if the Army did something they couldn't predict that took money away? That could make the agency, "look like we're not doing what we've said we'd be able to do," Aadland said.
War did come. So did the questions.
Could they support the power projection platform? Could they deliver on the single promise of letting the war-fighting commanders focus on the front and not worry about the installation management mission.
"Operation Iraqi Freedom put us in an operational stance where we had to come through," Aadland said.
The seven regional offices ran emergency operations around the clock. They lined up as partners with the commands at the front and delivered their part behind the lines.
"It shocked us into a level of maturity and partnership that had to come," Aadland said.
While the operations transformation proved sound, naysayers began questioning the commitment of keeping base operations money where it belongs.
"You never program for a war, so when we went, (the Army) had to rob somebody's cookie jar to get the troops into Baghdad," Aadland said.
Senior commanders flowed about $600 million of garrison funds into the fight.
But, they set up some new rules - they promised to pay it back.
And, they did.
When the president received supplemental monies from Congress to fight the war, the Army repaid the funds diverted for early operations. The migration of base operations funds that totaled hundreds of millions of dollars in fiscals 2001 and 2002 was $5 million in fiscal 2003.
"It was a first step into the programming discipline we'd been talking about," Aadland said about the change. "It's no longer easy to pick the low-hanging fruit from the tree."
"At one year in we are at the halfway point," Aadland said about the transformation. "We haven't proven our efficacy yet."
The next stop on the agency's road to becoming more efficient is to move installations to a common standard around the world.
"We will try to do things more efficiently and share ideas on how to apply those principles so everybody can benefit," Aadland promised. "To eliminate the haves and the have-nots."
The agency has developed standard garrison organizational outlines for small, medium, and large installations and are proceeding in staffing the manning document. Throughout fiscal 2004, they will flesh them out.
"Some installations are close; some are leagues away," Aadland said. "It will take some time for this migration."
But that migration, like last year's startup, has challenges inside and out.
The first two phases of the A-76 program threatened the workforce. Now, the "Third Wave" is surging a shock wave through it making workers ask, "Why is the Army hell-bent on taking away my job?"
"It's not," Aadland stresses. "But, it has said everything is going to be reviewed. The process will continue, but with more efficient guidance."
The general advises commands not to build a Most Efficient Organization to beat a contractor -- do a plan to do the job.
He also tells them not to expect the studies to go away.
"Whenever you can show a 30 percent savings, the Army isn't going to stop," he said. "Our challenge has been to educate our people on the optimal use of the private sector. We'll never be able to do it all in house. We will need industry to help us. And, we have to do it more efficiently."
Garrison commanders are asking how are they going to fit into the standard garrison structure while they are facing these studies.
"When the standard garrison construction doesn't mesh with A-76 configuration," Aadland said, "We're going to wait them out. If you have a contract that is set, and working, we will work the management scheme in the direction of the concept, but we won't disrupt the contract. We will wait until the end of the contract and take another look."
The key is tweaking performance work statements.
For example, A-76 has had a detrimental impact on master planning. Master planners don't make widgets - they are not producers. Under the A-76 process they have been seen as overhead.
"In some cases, we put the fox in the hen house," he explained. "Because we took the quality assurance people away.
"Many installation master plans atrophied - the art was lost. The key master planners became casualties of downsizing. We cannot afford to not have vision of where our installation will be in five, 10 or 20 years. Master planning is going to get resourced."
"Show me the money. Show me the money," was the chorus garrison commanders sang at the first agency commanders' conference last month. They were concerned about getting the resources and people they need to make a difference.
"(Have) faith in the concept and understanding of what cooperate means," Aadland tells them. "You are now part of a worldwide organization.
"When I talk to my regional directors, I tell them we are the 'Big Blue' of installation management for the Army and you are vice presidents. You, region director, are the focus lens of the agency. But, more importantly, you are the focus lens for the garrison commanders to see clearly what's happening in Washington."
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
