[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Bill Millward
Date: 08 Aug 2001
Time: 08:16:34
Regarding #423, with due respect to the Colonel Brinkerhoff, the argument suffers from the fallacy of ambiguity in that it fails to differentiate between running the Department as a business or incorporating business practices within the Department.
These are two separate issues entirely - the former correctly identified as an anathema to military operations and the later as simply good decision making.
In my time as a career naval officer and subsequent business consultant to the Department, few line officers in the Pentagon (not including acquisition professionals and other staff officer) ever demonstrated an ability to make financially-based decisions properly because 1) they were / are not trained to do so and 2) they often were / are tasked with finding ways to defend the boss's decision (a decision often politically motivated to support the boss's boss or for promotion).
In war, military officer's are taught to make decisions that effect the most efficient and effective route to victory. It requires tough decisions. For instance, what to carry and what not to carry based on one's capacity.
Business decisions may have different outcomes, but they fundamentally are about choice - what to do and what not to do; they are rooted only in a different context. There are hundreds of examples where modern business practices can be applied to Department processes resulting in savings that could be infused for modernization and readiness (one such area concerns disjoint metrics used by the Department). My experience as a business consultant is that there are only a few with decision making authority who truly get it.
Then again the issue perhaps is not one of running the Department as a business or incorporating business practices within the Department but rather a lack of courage to make tough decisions.
Bill