Improving the Army Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution System (PPBES)

Transcription

1 Imprving the Army Plnning, Prgrmming, Budgeting, nd Executin System (PPBES) The Plnning Phse wsmmmiqm STATES«? A Apprved fr Pubiic Relese Distributin Unlimited Leslie Lewis Hrry Thie Rger Brwn Jhn Schrder Arry Center

2 The reserch described in this reprt ws spnsred by the United Sttes Army, Cntrct N. DASW01-96-C Librry f Cngress Ctlging-in-Publictin Dt Imprving Army plnning, prgrmming, budgeting, nd executin system (PPBES) : the plnning phse / Leslie Lewis... [et l.l. p. cm. "MR-1133-A." Includes bibligrphicl references. ISBN Militry plnning United Sttes. I. Lewis, Leslie. U '0973 dc RAND is nnprfit institutin tht helps imprve plicy nd decisinmking thrugh reserch nd nlysis. RAND is registered trdemrk. RAND's publictins d nt necessrily reflect the pinins r plicies f its reserch spnsrs. Cpyright 2000 RAND All rights reserved. N prt f this bk my be reprduced in ny frm by ny electrnic r mechnicl mens (including phtcpying, recrding, r infrmtin strge nd retrievl) withut permissin in writing frm RAND. Published 2000 by RAND 1700 Min Street, P.O. Bx 2138, Snt Mnic, CA Suth Hyes Street, Arlingtn, VA RAND URL: T rder RAND dcuments r t btin dditinl infrmtin, cntct Distributin Services: Telephne: (310) ; Fx: (310) ; Internet: rder@rnd.rg

3 Imprving the Army Plnning, Prgrmming, Budgeting, nd Executin System (PPBES) The Plnning Phse Leslie Lewis Hrry Thie Rger Brwn Jhn Schrder Prepred fr the United Sttes Army RAND Arry Center Apprved fr public relese; distributin unlimited

4 Fr mre infrmtin n the RAND Arry Center, cntct the Directr f Opertins, (310) , extensin 6500, r visit the Arry Center's Web site t

5 PREFACE This reprt dcuments the wrk f RAND's Arry Center n the plnning phse f the Army Plnning, Prgrmming, Budgeting, nd Executin System (PPBES). Arry Center reserchers were sked t ssess the effectiveness f the reengineering f the Army plnning nd prgrmming prcess in fiscl yers (FY) 1995 nd The Army hd mdified its plnning nd prgrmming dcuments nd sked the Arry Center t ssess severl f them t determine the extent t which the reengineering ws successful nd t suggest imprvements. The mst imprtnt dcument is The Army Pln (TAP), the dcument tht links plnning t prgrmming nd prvides the initil prgrmming guidnce t the Army Prgrm Evlutin Grups (PEGs). It is the primry fcus f this reprt. This reprt ls dcuments RAND's ssessment nd recmmendtins fr TAP This reprt shuld be f interest t thse in the Deprtment f Defense nd in the Deprtment f the Army invlved in plnning nd prgrmming. The reserch ws spnsred by the U.S. Army's Deputy Chief f Stff fr Opertins nd Plns (DCSOPS) nd ws cnducted in RAND Arry Center's Strtegy, Dctrine, nd Resurces Prgrm. The Arry Center is federlly funded reserch nd develpment center spnsred by the United Sttes Army.

6 NTENTS Prefce in Figures vii Tbles ix Summry xi Acknwledgments xv Abbrevitins xvii Chpter One INTRODUCTION 1 Bckgrund 1 Purpse f This Prject 1 TheArmyPln (TAP) 2 Hw this Reprt Is Orgnized 3 Chpter Tw THE NTEXT OF TAP 5 Chpter Three REENGINEERING ARMY PROGRAMMING 9 The RAND Frmewrk 9 The Army Respnse 10 Chpter Fur ANALYSIS OF TAP 00-15: WHAT WAS ACMPLISHED. 13 Army Missin Ares (TAP 00-15) 13 Where D Missin Ares Cme Frm? 15 Wht Are the Army Missin Ares? 15

7 vi Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse Hw Are Missin Ares Orgnized in TAP 00-15? 16 Hw Were Missin Ares Fund in TAP Evluted? 16 Wht Prblems Did We Find With Missin Ares? 17 Initil Resurcing Guidnce: APGM nd Its Use 21 Chpter Five 23 REVISING TAP Apprch 1: Refine the Current Bseline 23 Apprch 2: Chnge the Structure f the Current Bseline 25 Apprch 3: Crete Hybrid Derived frm the Existing Bseline 2 Missin Ares Opertinl Objectives 29 Opertinl Cpbilities Assessment f the Three Apprches Perfrmnce Mesures Chpter Six NCLUSIONS AND REMMENDATIONS FOR TAP Develpment f TAP Recmmendtins fr Perfrmnce Mesures in TAP Overll Recmmendtins fr TAP Appendix A. LINKAGES AMONG JV2010, AV2010, AND ASPG 39 B. TRANSLATING GUIDANCE FROM THE ASPG TO TAP C. MISSION AREA TABLES D. STRAWMAN OPERATIONAL OBJECTIVES 53 E. STRAWMAN OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIES 55 F. HIERARCHY OF MISSION AREAS, OBJECTIVES, CAPABILITIES 59 Bibligrphy 65 45

8 FIGURES 2.1. Key TAP Reltinships Prgrmming Frmewrk Relting Army Cpbilities t CINC Missins Assessment f Three Apprches 31 Al. Linkges Amng JV2010, AV2010.ASPG 40 A.2. ASPG Identifies Tw Types f Demnds 41

9 TABLES 4.1. Missin Ares fr TAP Refining Cnduct Pecetime Opertins Missin Are 24

10 SUMMARY BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES During FY95 nd FY96, the Army reengineered its prgrmming prcess. The Army ls mdified its plnning nd prgrmming dcuments, such s the Army Strtegic Plnning Guidnce (ASPG), The Army Pln (TAP), the Army Prgrmming Guidnce Memrndum (APGM), nd the Prgrm Objectives Memrndum (POM) t reflect the new prcess. In 1997, the Army sked RAND Arry Center t ssess TAP fr t determine the extent t which reengineering effrts were reflected in tht dcument nd t suggest imprvements fr TAP ASSESSMENT OF TAP TAP incrprted the Missin Are (MA) cncept s wy f guging current nd future demnd fr Army cpbilities. Arry's nlysis f the Missin Ares identified six prblems: Mixing f pertinl nd institutinl functins Overlpping res Overly brd Missin Ares Inpprprite Missin Ares Unwieldy structure Imprecise perfrmnce mesures

11 xii Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse Mixing f pertinl nd institutinl functins. Since Missin Ares fcused n the Army's pertinl functins, they shuld nt cntin tsks sscited with institutinl functins such s trining r mintining specific types f cpbilities, e.g., decntmintin. Hwever, MAs in TAP cntined such functins. Overlpping res. Sme Missin Ares verlpped with thers. Fr exmple, the Perfrm Other Missins MA cntined missins tht belng in the Pecetime Opertins MA. Overly brd Missin Ares. The MA Generte the Frce nt nly cntined institutinl functins, it cntined lmst ll f them. Agin, the fcus f Missin Ares shuld be n specific pertinl cpbilities s they cn fcilitte identifictin f shrtflls. Inpprprite Missin Ares. TAP included Mintin Frce Rediness s MA. But n ccepted definitin f rediness exists. Wht cnsensus des exist views it s n utput tht represents the synthesis f number f inputs, e.g., trining nd equipping. Thus, it cut crss ll MAs nd des nt prvide gd bsis fr determining specific pertinl shrtflls t be ddressed in the resurcing prcess. Unwieldy rgniztinl structure. TAP cntined 10 MAs further subdivided int 122 pertinl tsks, which were further subdivided int pertinl cpbilities. There were t mny tsks t prvide cherent ssessment f wht cpbilities the Army needs. Imprecise perfrmnce stndrds. Perfrmnce stndrds re the tls the Army uses t determine its shrtflls in pertinl cpbilities. They mesure utcmes r utputs. The Generl Accunting Office hs derived set f chrcteristics fr gd perfrmnce stndrds. When these re pplied t thse in TAP 00-15, severl discrepncies pper. Fr exmple, the Generl Accunting Office (GAO) recmmended tht perfrmnce stndrds be limited t the vitl few. TAP hs 1,248. REVISING TAP The methdlgy used t mke recmmendtins fr revising TAP cnsidered three pprches tht refined the MAs nd subr-

12 Summry xiii dinte levels. These three pprches were develped in respnse t the spnsr's guidnce. Apprch 1: refining the current bseline. This pprch preserved definitins nd existing MAs. It fcused n clrifying ctegries nd cpbilities. Apprch 2: chnging the structure f the current bseline. This pprch chnged definitins nd MAs, nd it refined the plcement f tsks nd cpbilities. Apprch 3: creting hybrid derived frm the existing bseline. The lst pprch used the best f the bseline nd Apprches 1 nd 2 t frm suggested hierrchy. It is prpsed hierrchy f MAs, pertinl bjectives, nd pertinl cpbilities. These pprches were then ssessed using criteri develped in the nlysis f the TAP. This ssessment prvided n rry f lterntive pprches fr the Army nd ssessed their cmprtive dvntges nd disdvntges. REMMENDATIONS FOR TAP With respect t TAP 02-17, the reserch tem recmmends tht the Army tke the fllwing ctins s n utgrwth f Apprch 3: Reduce MAs t thse tht fcus n pertinl missins nd relign the MA hierrchy use pertinl bjectives nd cpbilities s subrdinte levels f the MAs. The MAs re dynmic nd shuld be drwn directly frm the strtegy in the Defense Plnning Guidnce. Cmmence MA ssessments befre the publictin f Army Strtegic Plnning Guidnce nd the beginning f TAP wrk. The MA ssessments shuld strt with the current POM t evlute wht ws resurced in the current prgrm. Cnsider plcing respnsibility fr the MAs nd ssessments (but nt TAP) in different sectin f the ffice f the Army Deputy Chief Stff fr Opertins nd Plns (DCSOPS) nd give it greter linkge t strtegic plnning.

13 xiv Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse Seprte the ASPG, TAP, nd APGM frm being develped cncurrently nd insure tht they re dne in prgressive sequence ver lnger perid.

14 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The uthrs cknwledge the fllwing peple fr their ssistnce nd supprt: Mjr Christine Andersn, frmlly f Resurce Anlysis nd Integrtin Office, DCSOPS (DAMO-ZR) nd nw in the Office f Cngressinl Liisn (OCLL). She versw the prject nd llwed us t explre vrius ptins fr imprving the MA ssessments. We wuld ls like t thnk Clnel Ptrick Bennett (USA, ret.) nd Clnel Chrles Rsh (USA, ret.), wh wrked with us nd members f the Army Stff in develping ur nlyses. Frm RAND we wuld like t thnk ur reserch ssistnts: Aniss Thmpsn, Kenneth Myers, Trci Willims, Omid Ftthi, nd Mtthew Gershwin. Jerry Sllinger prvided invluble recmmendtins n hw t mke the mnuscript mre redble. Denn Weber edited nd ssembled the finl pper. The uthrs, f curse, re respnsible fr ny shrtcmings in the reserch.

15 ABBREVIATIONS APGM Army Prgrmming Guidnce Memrndum ASPG Army Strtegic Plnning Guidnce AV2010 Army Visin 2010 AVCSA Assistnt Vice Chief f Stff f the Army CINC Cmmnder in Chief CJCS Chirmn f the Jint Chiefs f Stff NUS Cntinentl United Sttes CPR Chirmn's Prgrm Recmmendtin DPA&E Directr, Prgrm Anlysis nd Evlutin DCSOPS Deputy Chief f Stff fr Opertins nd Plns DD Deprtment f Defense DPG Defense Plnning Guidnce FY Fiscl Yer FYDP Future Yers Defense Prgrm GAO Generl Accunting Office GPRA Gvernment Perfrmnce nd Results Act JCS Jint Chiefs f Stff JPD Jint Plnning Dcument

16 xviii Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse JROC Jint Requirements Oversight Cuncil JS Jint Stff JV2010 Jint Visin 2010 JVIMP Jint Visin Implementtin Mster Pln JWCA Jint Wrfighting Cpbilities Assessment LOC Line f Cmmunictin MA Missin Are MDEP Mngement Decisin Pckge MTW Mjr Theter Wr NMS Ntinl Militry Strtegy OBP Objective Bsed Plnning ONUS Outside the Cntinentl United Sttes OSD Office f the Secretry f Defense PEG Prgrm Evlutin Grup POM Prgrm Objective Memrndum PPBES Plnning, Prgrmming, Budgeting, nd Executin System QDR Qudrennil Defense Review SSC Smller-Scle Cntingencies TAP The Army Pln TRADOC Trining nd Dctrine Cmmnd UJTL Universl Jint Tsk List WMD Wepns f Mss Destructin

17 Chpter One INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND During fiscl yers (FY) 1995 nd 1996, the Army reengineered its prgrmming prcess. The reengineering required bth rgniztinl nd prcedurl chnges. 1 Fr exmple, new psitin, the Assistnt Vice Chief f Stff Army (AVCSA), ws creted nd given the respnsibility fr prgrm integrtin crss the Army Stff. The Prgrm Evlutin Grups (PEGs), which ply centrl rle in prgrmming, were rergnized, nd Missin Are (MA) tems were estblished within the ffice f the Deputy Chief f Stff fr Opertins nd Plns (DCSOPS). PURPOSE OF THIS PROIECT In 1997 the Army sked tht RAND Arry Center ssist in the reengineering f The Army Pln (TAP). The Army ls reinstituted strtegic plnning nd the prduct ws the Army Strtegic Plnning Guidnce (ASPG), which prvides strtegic guidnce t TAP. 2 Plnning nd prgrmming in the Army re centrlized within the Deprtment f the Army's hedqurters. This dcument discusses the Arry Center's wrk n TAP. x See Leslie Lewis, Rger Brwn, nd Jhn Schrder, Imprving Army PPBES: The Prgrmming Phse, Snt Mnic, CA: RAND, MR-934-A, 1999, nd Leslie Lewis, Rger Brwn, nd Jhn Schrder, Imprving the Army's Resurce Decisinmking, Snt Mnic, CA: RAND, DB-294-A, Leslie Lewis, Rger Brwn, nd Jhn Schrder, unpublished reserch.

18 2 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse The Army hd substntilly chnged its prgrmming prcess nd sscited dcuments. The Arry Center ws sked t ssess severl dcuments, including TAP fr the yers , t determine t wht extent the reengineering tht hd been dne ws successful nd suggest imprvements fr the next TAP ( ). This reprt dcuments RAND's ssessment nd recmmendtins. The Army specificlly sked fr cmment n the fllwing res: Independence f MAs nd PEGs Fcus f MAs Opertinl bjectives Perfrmnce mesures, stndrds, nd risk ssessment RAND's nlysis f the ther Army plnning nd prgrmming dcuments is reprted elsewhere. 3 The Army is cntinuing its reengineering effrts nd implementing further chnges. THE ARMY PLAN (TAP) TAP, like ther plnning nd prgrmming dcuments, is published biennilly in the dd yers. It reflects the Ntinl Militry Strtegy (NMS) nd the Defense Plnning Guidnce (DPG) nd guides the Army's Plnning, Prgrmming, Budgeting, nd Executin System (PPBES). 4 It drws n plnning scenris t identify cmbt frce requirements nd, fr ech prgrm yer, develps frce tht meets the requirements within nticipted persnnel nd budget ceilings. TAP prjects requirements fr the ner term (0-5 yers), middle term (6-15 yers), nd lng term (15-20 yers). TAP is designed t set the initil prgrmming pririties within the nticipted resurces. TAP cntins three min sectins. The first prvides the Army's strtegic plnning guidnce. The secnd rticultes institutinl gls nd bjectives, nd the finl sectin is the APGM. 3 See Lewis etl., Imprving the Army PPBES: The Prgrmming Phse. 4 Elements f this descriptin hve been drwn frm Hw the Army Runs: A Senir Leder Reference Hndbk, , Crlisle Brrcks, PA: U.S. Deprtment f the Army, 1997.

19 Intrductin HOW THIS REPORT IS ORGANIZED This reprt hs five chpters. Chpter Tw describes the cntext in which TAP is develped. Chpter Three presents thse prtins f wrk n reengineering Army prgrmming tht re relevnt t TAP. Chpter Fur cntins the nlysis f the TAP. Chpter Five presents recmmendtins but hw the TAP shuld be mdified, nd Chpter Six prvides brief summry nd cnclusins.

20 Chpter Tw THE NTEXT OF TAP This chpter sets TAP in the cntext f the externl nd internl prcesses nd dcuments tht it intercts with nd respnds t. TAP is nt prduced in vcuum, nd it is imprtnt t understnd hw ther prcesses nd dcuments ffect it becuse they shpe much f the mteril TAP incrprtes. In turn, TAP ls sets in mtin severl internl Army prcesses nd rects t thers. TAP is the primry plnning dcument tht prvides the Army with plnning nd prgrmming guidnce. The respnsibility fr TAP cmes under the Chief f the Resurce Anlysis nd Integrtin Office. T understnd the dynmics f the supply, demnd, nd integrtin mdel nd hw it prvides fr recgnitin nd djudictin f these different demnds, it is necessry t understnd the reltinships mng key externl nd Army prcesses nd prducts. 1 Eqully imprtnt is the time hrizn lng which ech f the identified elements pertes. Figure 2.1 prtrys these elements. The time hrizns in the figure re ner (nw t five yers ut), ner-t-mid term (6-15 yers ut), nd the future (15-20 yers ut). The left-hnd side f Figure 2.1 identifies thse dcuments nd prcesses sscited with the Office f the Secretry f Defense (OSD) nd the Jint Stff (JS) tht ffect bth Army plnning nd pr ^ee Figure 3.1 in Chpter Three fr further explntin f the supply, demnd, integrtin mdel.

21 6 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse RAND MRU Jint Visin 2010 \ Army Visin 2010 "3 Jint Visin 2010 Implementtin Mster Pln (JVIMP). ±.. p 5 tö t ASPG Defense Plnning, The Army Pln (TAP) Guidnce "l 1, c itrtenin Plnninn Gutrincp. Z j, 2. Army Missin Are L _s_.v 1 3. Prgrm Guidnce Mem CINC missins Z t JWCA/JROC Figure 2.1 Key TAP Reltinships grmming. TAP is shped by bth dcuments nd prcesses. Tw dcuments, the Jint Visin 2010 (JV2010) nd Jint Visin 2010 Implementtin Mster Pln (JVIMP), were develped by the JS nd hve rmifictins fr hw externl demnds shpe Army pertinl nd, t lesser extent, institutinl demnds. The initil versin f JV2010 ws published in JV2010 is pertinlly fcused n future wys t fight. It rgues fr full-spectrum jint frce tht perfrms semless pertins nd defets ppnents by dminting infrmtin, by bth prviding it t friendly frces nd denying it t ppnents. The dptin f new pertinl cncepts thrugh the pplictin f lep-hed technlgies is criticl t JV2010. Fr exmple, fcused lgistics, ne f fur centrl pertinl cncepts fetured in the dcument, rgues tht technlgy cn reduce the lrge lgistics tils tht typified pertins in Wrld

22 The Cntext f TAP Wr II nd the Gulf Wr. Rpid trnsprttin technlgies t prvide ssets quickly nd infrmtin technlgy t trck nd shift ssets s needed wuld reduce lgistics requirements. 2 Sn fter the publictin f JV2010, the JS initited n exmintin f hw it might be implemented. JVIMP builds n the generl cncepts lid ut in JV2010 nd identifies ptentil pths fr hw the cncepts might be develped nd implemented. It cncentrtes n the pplictin f technlgy in rder t ttin full-spectrum dminnce, tht is, dminnce in ll types f cnflict. 3 The criticl element f JVIMP is its fcus n the services' respnsibilities fr prviding jint cpbilities nd the required crdinting ctivities. The DPG prvides guidnce t bth the pertinl nd institutinl elements, ech f which must be specificlly ddressed in the Army's prgrm. The Jint Wrfighting Cpbilities Assessment (JWCA) prcess prvides series f JS ssessments f the need fr nd vilbility f current nd future pertinl cpbilities, s defined by the Cmmnders in Chief (CINCs). The JS then uses the utput f the vrius JWCA ssessments t evlute the services' bility t meet CINC demnds nw nd in the middle term. The pertinl demnds estblished by the CINCs nd refined in the JWCA/Jint Requirements Oversight Cuncil (JROC) prcess re linked t the Army thrugh the Army Missin Ares. The right side f Figure 2.1 begins with Army Visin 2010 (AV2010), which ws develped by the Army in respnse t JV2010. Its publictin preceded tht f the JVIMP. Like JV2010, AV2010 builds n the cncept f infrmtin dminnce but within the Army's pertinl cnstruct. Fr instnce, infrmtin dminnce is ccmplished thrugh cncept f mentl gility tht clls fr digitiztin f the Army, including mny f its existing pltfrms. AV2010 fcuses n mjr theter wrs (MTWs). Opertins such s pecekeeping nd humnitrin ssistnce re treted s lesser included ctivities; if the Army cn hndle MTWs, then the cpbilities required t cnduct smller-scle cntingencies (SSCs) nd pece- generl Jhn Shlikshvili, //rcf Visin 2010, Wshingtn, D.C., 1996, pp Jint Visin Implementtin Mster Pln, Wshingtn, D.C., June 1,1997.

23 8 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse keeping-like pertins re ccmmdted. 4 This is defined s fullspectrum dminnce. Appendix A illustrtes the linkges mng JV2010, AV2010, nd the ASPG. It ls illustrtes the pertinl nd institutinl demnds plced upn the Army. As Figure 2.1 suggests, ll f these dcuments nd prcesses help shpe TAP. TAP prvides plnning guidnce t the Army bsed n externl prcesses. TAP is ls the primry plnning dcument tht prvides prgrmming guidnce t the Army. Imprtntly, ny prpsed chnges t Army prcesses must ccmmdte these externl prcesses nd functins. The Army's prgrm must demnstrte tht it is respnsive t the diverse issues rised by OSD, the Jint Stff, nd Cngress. Fr exmple, it wuld be difficult t discuss the Army's pertinl rediness nd justify resurce chices t the CJCS by exclusively discussing rediness within the cntext f Army mderniztin. On the ther hnd, it wuld be difficult t describe t the OSD nd Cngress hw the Army is cring fr its militry fmilies by discussin f its pertinl rediness, lthugh if dependents re nt being sufficiently tken cre f, verll Army rediness wuld mst certinly be ffected. 4 This ssumptin ws lter repudited by prts f the Army during the Qudrennil Defense Review. Army nlyses shwed tht SSCs nd pecekeeping-type pertins ften required MTW-like cpbilities s well s sets f cpbilities tht re missin unique. Fr exmple, pecekeeping pertins ften require lrge numbers f militry plice, cpbility tht is ls required in MTWs but perhps in smller numbers. Mst pecekeeping pertins ls require freign re fficers wh re lnguge prficient nd knwledgeble but lcl custms nd behvirs, cpbility nt ften required in lrge-scle grund pertins with tw mjr ppsing frces.

24 Chpter Three REENGINEERING ARMY PROGRAMMING This chpter describes the spects f the reengineering tht re mst imprtnt t TAP nd shws the mechnisms the Army estblished t implement them. A mdel f supply, demnd, nd integrtin is centrl t the Army's reengineering effrts nd t wht shuld pper in TAP This chpter nd the previus ne re precnditins t understnding Chpter Fur, the nlysis f the results f the reengineering f the TAP. THE RAND FRAMEWORK This ssessment f TAP is shped by frmewrk derived frm the ecnmic mdel. The RAND-develped frmewrk ppers in Figure 3.1. The pertinl demnd, depicted n the left side f the digrm s jint demnd fr Army cpbilities, my be thught f s demnd in ecnmic terms. It cnsists f thse cpbilities tht nly the Army cn prvide t the CINCs t perfrm their missins. The institutinl demnds, depicted n the right side f the figure s cpbilities prvided by the Army, my be thught f s the supply nd re thse ctivities tht supprt the genertin f the Army-unique cpbilities needed t stisfy the CINCs' pertinl demnds. Put in ecnmic terms, they re the "supply" tht meets the CINCs' demnds. Fr exmple, "trin future leders" is n institutinl requirement, s is "ensure tht the Army's reserch nd technlgy prgrms re sufficiently funded t prvide needed infrmtin

25 10 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse RAND MR Visin Army strtegic plnning Army decisins Figure 3.1 Prgrmming Frmewrk technlgy in supprt f Army XXI." The rrws indicte the itertive nture f the prcess. 1 THE ARMY RESPONSE Figure 3.2 shws the frmewrk implemented within the Army s f spring 1998 nd its reltinship t the vrius externl rgniztins nd functins. The figure reitertes tht there is single Army in which tw distinct elements must be recgnized nd resurced: the institutinl, indicted by the Army Title 10 functins shwn n the right, nd the pertinl, indicted by the Army MAs n the left. This cncept is expnded upn t ccmmdte hw the externl envirnment shpes Army demnds thrugh existing prcesses nd functins. Figure 3.2 shws these reltinships nd their interctins with the Army. x In nther cntext, the MA/PEG reltinship is nlgus t supply nd demnd. The PEGs re n the supply side, while the MAs re n the demnd side. They must be kept seprte in rder t hve functins independent f ech ther.

26 Reengineering Army Prgrmming 11 The left-hnd side f the figure shws the linkge between the CINC wrfighting missins nd Army MAs. The CINC missins re extrcted frm the DPG, the Qudrennil Defense Review (QDR) reprt, nd the recently published Deprtment f Defense (DD) guidnce n new missins fr the DD. The Gvernment Perfrmnce Pln fr FY99 ls lists the DD MAs. The structure ssists the Army in trnslting the DD MAs int Army MAs. The derived Army MAs were creted t fcilitte the identifictin nd ssessment f prgress twrd pertinl bjectives, tsks, nd relted cpbilities tht re clsely sscited with the Army. The Army MAs enble the Army t fcus n thse cpbilities mst clsely sscited with it but within the brder cntext f the jint envirnment. I RAND MR Ntinl Militry Strtegy Shpe, Respnd, Prepre ARMY VISION Defense Plnning Guidnce Army gls Strtegic plnning: CINC MISSIONS: Relted pertinl tsks Deter nd Defet Attcks n the U.S. Deter nd Defet / Aggressin Aginst Allies, \ etc. Prtect the Lives f U.S. Citizens Abrd Underwrite nd Fster Reginl Stbility Cunter Reginl Threts I Invlving WMD Deter nd Cunter Terrrism Prvide Humnitrin nd Disster Relief Cunter Prductin nd Trfficking f Illegl Drugs m Army Missin Ares Deply the frce Sustin the frce Win the lnd bttle Achieve dminnt bttlefield f wreness/inf dminnce Cnduct pecetime pertins Prtect the frce Mintin frce rediness Prmte reginl security Perfrm ther missins Generte the frce i > Ttl Army cpbilities Army Title 10 functins Mn Trin Equip Orgnize Sustin Instlltins Pririties nd investment strtegy Requirements f wrfighting CINCs Figure 3.2 Relting Army Cpbilities t CINC Missins

27 12 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse Tw spects f the figure represent mrked deprture frm pst prcedures. Mst ntble is the cretin f the Army MAs s wy f ensuring tht plnning nd prgrmming supprt the CINC requirements. The secnd chnge is the rgniztin f the PEGs lng the lines f the six brd Title 10 functins. 2 The functin f PEGs is t llcte Army resurces t prgrms ver the POM/FYDP yers. The PEGs fllw pririties set in the APGM s they llcte resurces. The cmpsite effrt f the PEGs results in decisins by the Army ledership n the Army POM. Previusly, the Army hd 14 PEGs rgnized t supprt cmbintin f stff functins, rgniztins, nd specil interest res tht wrked independently. Little crdintin ccurred mng them; the resulting Army prgrm represented n ggregtin f individul prgrm grups rther thn truly integrted prgrm. Furthermre, withut the Army MAs, there ws n wy t ensure tht the Army prgrm stisfied the demnds f the CINCs. In FY97-98, the Army begn t implement the pertinl element s prt f its reengineering ctivities. MAs, which fcused n identifictin nd evlutin f thse Army cpbilities tht were criticl t supprting the CINC missins, were intrduced. The Army implementtin, hwever, fell shrt f prducing useful mechnism t determine needed cpbilities. 3 2 Title 10 spells ut twelve functins fr the Army. Hwever, nly six hve direct resurcing implictins nd therefre, nly six PEGs were creted: mn, equip, trin, sustin, rgnize, nd instlltins. 3 The intent f the cncept ws t prvide ssessments f current nd future cpbilities tht Army prgrmming wuld resurce thrugh the effrts f the PEGs. Fr further explntin f the PEG/MA reltinship, see Leslie Lewis, Rger Brwn, nd Jhn Schrder, Imprving the Army's Resurce Decisinmking, Snt Mnic, CA: RAND, DB-294-A, 2000.

28 Chpter Fur ANALYSIS OF TAP 00-15: WHAT WAS ACMPLISHED The Army Pln ws develped under chllenging cnditins. The develpment f the ASPG, which becmes the new first sectin f TAP, represented the first time such n effrt hd been crried ut in severl yers. In prir yers, the initil sectins f TAP prvided summries f the strtegic envirnment, ptentil threts, nd implictins fr the Army, lng with Army ledership strtegic guidnce fr the future. This ws brd in nture nd lcked the specific bjectives, trnsfrmtin pth, nd cnnectivity nw fund in ASPG. 1 (Appendix B explins hw the guidnce in the ASPG trnsltes int TAP nd hw the Army subsequently respnds t the guidnce.) Further, the schedule fr POM ws cmpressed. The result ws mrginlly chnged TAP in which the three mjr sectins were prepred cncurrently rther thn in the intended sequence ver lnger perid. ARMY MISSION AREAS (TAP 00-15) This nlysis fcuses n the new sectin in the reengineered TAP clled the Army Missin Ares, which is sectin 2 f TAP. The MA cncept ws designed s methd by which the Army culd ssess the current nd future demnd fr pertinl cpbilities. MAs prvide greter specificity thn is fund in the Army visin nd strtegic plnning guidnce but hw the Army will meet the strtegic demnds creted by ntinl strtegies, defense guidnce, 1 Leslie Lewis, Rger Brwn, nd Jhn Schrder, unpublished reserch. 13

29 14 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse nd brd nd cntinuing CINC missins thrugh the Army's visin nd cre cmpetency. MAs ggregte the Army's pertinl cpbilities in n understndble wy. As such, MAs re the brdest ggregtes f n Army-level hierrchy tht prceeds dwn thrugh pertinl tsks nd cpbilities. At the next-highest level f the hierrchy, pertinl tsks re nt s specific s thse tht exist t the lwer pertinl cpbility r perfrmnce stndrd levels f the hierrchy. Hwever, MAs need t be precise enugh t present the Army in "wht-we-cn-d" terms. MAs nd their subrdinte cmpnents re the Army t the ntin, t Cngress, t the OSD, nd t the CINCs. MAs shuld be expressed in mnner tht llws n ssessment t be mde f hw well ech is being chieved. MAs cme frm relentless fcus (thrugh the lens f the Army visin nd cre cmpetencies) n the externl pertinl requirements. 2 This fcus shuld be n current nd future demnds, nt n wht hs histriclly been prvided. MAs shuld be distinct frm ech ther; they shuld be mutully exclusive t gin clrity nd t llw sttement f cler pririties mng them. The MAs cut hrizntlly crss the institutinl functins, nd ech MA must hve n dvcte with brd pertinl r dctrinl perspective n hw the internl functins enble the pertinl cpbilities. MAs guide decisins but curses f ctin nd but the llctin f inputs by internl functins t btin desired utputs nd utcmes. Investments in these institutinl functins, rther thn in MAs directly, set future directin nd llw ssessment f the Army's bility t prvide needed pertinl cpbilities. MAs re mre shrt-lived thn the mre enduring Army Title 10 missins, Army visin, nd Army cre cmpetency. MAs, pertinl tsks, nd pertinl cpbilities re smething t be ccmplished 2 The U.S. Army Visin describes the wrld's best rmy, full-spectrum frce trined nd redy fr victry. It is ttl frce f qulity sldiers nd civilins: vlues-bsed rgniztin, n integrl prt f the jint tem, equipped with the mst mdern wepns nd equipment tht the cuntry cn prvide, ble t respnd t ur ntin's needs, nd chnging t meet chllenges f tdy, tmrrw, nd the 21st century. The Army's cre cmpetency is cmpsed f qulity peple, leder develpment, frce mix, trining, dctrine, nd mdern equipment. Army Strtegic Plnning Guidnce '99, Drft, Mrch 2, Subsequently, Army Chief f Stff Erik Shinseki relesed new Army Visin n Octber 12,1999.

30 Anlysis f TAP 00-15: Wht Ws Accmplished 15 t prticulr mments ver the plnning hrizn. MAs my chnge s strtegic demnds chnge. Where D Missin Ares Cme Frm? The MAs derive frm the CINC missins, nd they re specified in the ASPG. Anlysis f the CINC missins determined tht they were t brd fr Army prgrmming purpses, nd resulted in n initil set f MAs, identified using txnmy clled Objectives-Bsed Plnning (OBP). 3 Wrk in TAP cncentrted n the intrductin f the MAs nd sme initil ssessments f the sufficiency f current nd future Army cpbilities by d hc grups. This ltter effrt filed t prvide useful methdlgy fr ssessment. Wht Are the Army Missin Ares? The MAs reflect brd pertinl ctivities tht the Army hs t perfrm. Tble 4.1 lists the 10 Army MAs cntined in TAP Tble 4.1 Missin Ares fr TAP Win the Lnd Bttle Cnduct Pecetime Opertins Prmte Reginl Stbility Perfrm Other Missins Achieve Dminnt Bttlefield Awreness nd Infrmtin Dminnce Deply the Frce Prtect the Frce Sustin the Frce Generte the Frce Mintin Frce Rediness NOTE: The Army dded three Missin Ares t the seven tht the Arry Center develped: Deply the Frce, Generte the Frce, nd Mintin Frce Rediness. 3 The OBP methdlgy hs lng histry t RAND. Initilly develped fr use by the Air Frce, it ws clled Strtegy-t-Tsks. The methdlgy ws lter expnded t link t specific resurces nd t be much mre fcused n jint pertins. See Kent (1983), Lewis nd Rll (1993), Pirnie (1996), nd Lewis, Pirnie, et l. (1999).

31 16 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse Hw Are Missin Ares Orgnized in TAP 00-15? Ech MA ws rgnized int series f pertinl tsks tht re the primry things the Army hs t d in the prticulr MA. 4 Tsks in turn re cmpsed f pertinl cpbilities tht enble the Army t ccmplish these tsks. Ech MA ls hs perfrmnce stndrds t help the Army determine hw much is required under ptiml circumstnces nd, lterntively, hw much is criticl t ccmplish the tsk with cceptble risk. An exmple, drwn frm TAP 00-15, f ne MA nd its subcmpnents ppers belw. Missin Are: Win the Lnd Bttle Opertinl tsk: Mintin rer re security Opertinl cpbility: Prvide frces nd equipment t secure lines f cmmunictin (LOC) Perfrmnce stndrd: Ensure sufficient frces nd equipment t secure designted LOC in ccrdnce with pertinl requirements TAP cntined 10 MAs, 122 pertinl tsks, 789 pertinl cpbilities, nd 1,248 perfrmnce stndrds. 5 Hw Were Missin Ares Fund in TAP Evluted? T ssess the MAs, tsks, nd cpbilities, set f criteri frequently were pplied t sttements f bjectives in decisinmking. Objectives shuld hve the fllwing chrcteristics: 6 Opertinl: dne withut functinl r institutinl elements. Resnbly cmplete: blnced nd dequtely ddressing ll needs nd cncerns. 4 Fr TAP 00-15, the rgniztinl structure fr MAs cnsisted f Opertinl Tsks, Opertinl Cpbilities, nd Perfrmnce Stndrds. See The Army Pln, PY , U.S.Army, The Army Pln FY , See fr exmple, Rlph L. Keeney, "Structuring Objectives fr Prblems f Public Interest," Opertins Reserch, Vl. 36, N. 3, My-June 1988, p. 396, r Krig W. Kirkwd, Strtegic Decisin Mking, Belmnt, CA: Duxbury Press, 1997.

32 Anlysis f TAP 00-15: Wht Ws Accmplished 17 Unique, nt redundnt: imprtnce within ne prt f the hierrchy shuld nt depend n imprtnce in ther prts f the hierrchy. Operble nd mesurble: must be lgiclly tied t higher nd lwer levels f the hierrchy nd cnvey mesurble expecttins. Few in number: must be understndble nd explicble. Perfrmnce stndrds: ssessibility f these stndrds. T ssess perfrmnce stndrds, we drew n chrcteristics tht the GAO hs determined such stndrds shuld meet: 7 Shw degree t which desired results re chieved Limited t vitl few, essentil fr decisin mking Respnsive t multiple pririties; blnce cmpeting demnds Respnsibility linked; estblish ccuntbility fr results Wht Prblems Did We Find With Missin Ares? We identified six prblems with the set f MAs in TAP 00-15: sme cnfuse pertinl nd institutinl functins, sme verlp with ther MAs, sme re t brd, sme re inpprprite, the current rgniztinl structure f the individul MAs is unwieldy, nd the perfrmnce stndrds re neither useful nr usble. Mixing pertinl nd institutinl functins. Sme f the current MAs cnfused pertinl nd functinl ctivities. Fr instnce, the Generte the Frce MA replicted number f tsks sscited with the Title 10 functins, such s prvide sufficient frces. Furthermre, the MAs cntined such functinl tsks s "Assure the U.S. bility t perte in chemiclly nd bilgiclly cntminted res" (Army Missin Are Dt Bse, Jnury 15, 1998, tsk bl) nd "Mintin system fr evluting the Reserve Cmpnent deplyment prerequisites" (Army Missin Are Dt Bse, Jnury 15,1998, 7 U.S. GAO, Executive Guide: Effectively Implementing the GPRA, GAO-GGD , Wshingtn D.C., June 1996.

33 18 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse tsk cp4), bth f which re functinl ctivities sscited with the institutinl Army. An exmple f gd pertinl tsk is "cntrl mvement with rdblcks." Therefre, this mix f pertinl nd institutinl functins des nt meet ur "pertinl" criterin. Replicting PEG ctivities diminishes the purpse f the MAs, which need t fcus n the identifictin f shrtflls in pertinl cpbilities. Attempts t link the MAs t PEG functins thrugh identifictin f thse functins des nt infrm the PEGs f pertinl requirements nr wht crrective ctins re necessry by the PEGs t fix identified pertinl shrtflls. Overlpping Missin Ares. Arry reserch prvided bseline list f MAs t the Army. The prject identified the Perfrm Other Missins MA s cllectr fr such missins s cunterdrugs nd cunterterrrism tht culd nt be lgiclly gruped within the ther MAs. Hwever, subsequent Army wrk identified new MA: Cnduct Pecetime Opertins. Since this new ctegry subsumed such missins s cunterdrug, it shuld nw becme the cllectr fr ll the missins identified in Perfrm Other Missins, which shuld thus be blished, its pertinl elements gruped under Cnduct Pecetime Opertins. As n dditinl nte, Perfrm Other Missins ls included number f institutinl tsks, e.g., t identify trining issues. Agin, these shuld be remved frm the MA becuse they re PEG tsks tht re replicted in the trining, equipping, nd mnning PEGs. This des nt meet the "unique, nt redundnt" criterin. Overly brd Missin Ares. The MA Generte the Frce is the mst prblemtic, fr nt nly des it include PEG functins, it included mst f them. Additinlly, it des nt cpture ll the institutinl elements necessry t generte the frce nd therefre des nt meet the "few in number" criterin. This MA reflected the ttempts by the missin re tems t direct PEG ctivities by linking t ll Army resurces (like the PEG), rther thn t infrm the PEGs but the pertinl shrtflls crss the POM tht need t be ddressed. The MA ls lst the fcus n infrming the externl udiences but wht pertinl cpbilities the Army prvides t CINCs nd Army emphsis n directing the PEGs' decisins.

34 Anlysis f TAP 00-15: Wht Ws Accmplished 19 Inpprprite Missin Ares. Figure 3.2 lists ne MA s Mintin Frce Rediness. Rediness is cmplex issue; n cnsistent definitin exists within the DD. But since the QDR, rediness hs incresingly been defined s n utput f resurcing ctivities, rther thn s n input. It is viewed s cnsisting f ll the elements necessry t prduce frce cpble f prviding pertinl cpbilities t the CINCs. Thus, rediness is mesured s the utput f everything service des t develp nd sustin frce: trining, equipping, mnning, etc. Defining rediness s MA is prblemtic becuse it limits its utility t nly fcusing n the PEG ctivities; it ls replicted bth the Generte the Frce nd Sustin the Frce MAs, which in turn ls prtilly replicte PEG tsks. Rediness cuts crss ll the MAs nd the PEGs, fr in its brdest definitin, it prvides the bility t mesure hw service hs resurced t meet its ner-, mid-, nd lngterm pertinl requirements. This fils t meet the "perfrmnce stndrds" criterin becuse rediness is n utput functin. Unwieldy rgniztinl structure. Ech MA hs number f tsks. TAP hd 122 distinct pertinl tsks crss the 10 MAs. The current structure relies n pertinl tsks s wy t identify required pertinl cpbilities. Frm plnning nd prgrmming perspective, there were t mny pertinl tsks t prvide cherent ssessment t the Army ledership nd externl udiences f wht pertinl cpbilities the Army needs. Furthermre, pertinl tsks were nt unique t prticulr MA; they were repeted crss mny. The resulting pertinl cpbilities culd nt be ssessed bsed n their bility t perfrm the ttlity f the MA; they cn nly be evluted ginst prticulr tsk sscited with multiple MAs' ttempts t direct the PEGs. This pprch resulted in determintin f the requirement fr prticulr pertinl cpbility, bsed n hw ften n pertinl tsk ws repeted crss ll the MAs. Hving MAs tht re fcused n Title 10 functins cmpunded the prblem, nd therefre much f the nlysis resulted in pertinl cpbilities tht re defined slely by their Title 10 elements f peple, equipment, infrstructure, nd trining. Thus, Title 10 requirements were identified, nd the pertinl cpbility ws rrely if ever identified. This des nt meet the "pertinl" nd "few in number" criteri.

35 20 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse Imprecise perfrmnce stndrds. The implementtin f the Gvernment Perfrmnce nd Results Act (GPRA) plced incresing emphsis n mesurement, prticulrly the mesurement f results. Perfrmnce mesurement tht is tngible nd bjective is deemed best. Such mesurement incrprtes severl spects. First, metric r scle represents the specific chrcteristic used t guge perfrmnce. This cn be thught f s yrdstick (feet, inches) if the chrcteristic f interest is length. In essence, the scle r metric hs t relte t wht is being mesured. The secnd prt is gl r stndrd, which is the trget level f perfrmnce t be chieved. Fr exmple, ne might wnt t cut tw-by-furs int three-ft lengths. The perfrmnce gl is three feet n the yrdstick metric. The third prt is mesure f ctul chievement. One cn ssess the results f cutting the tw-by-furs. Within sme tlernce, the ctivity f cutting hs met the specifictin (stndrd) f three-ft lengths r it hs nt. The perfrmnce stndrd is wht ne is trying t chieve with pln, prgrm, r ctivity, nd this cn be mesured (n the relevnt scle) ginst ctul results. Results cn be f tw types: utcmes nd utputs. Outcmes re the finl results chieved in reltin t desired bjectives. Outputs re the intermedite results f prcesses nd cntribute t utcmes. Fr exmple, units (rgnized peple nd equipment) re n utput tht cntributes t finl utcme. Outcme mesures re better thn just mesures f utputs, but they re nt lwys pssible. Cnversely, sme systems re s cmplex tht neither utput nr utcme mesurements seem pssible, s inputs t the prcesses re mesured insted. Mrever, GPRA ls recgnizes tht sme systems d nt esily llw fr bjective r tngible mesurement. When bjective mesurement is nt pssible, subjective ssessments my be mde but must be in terms tht wuld permit n independent determintin f whether the eventul perfrmnce crrespnded t the desired perfrmnce sttement. The GAO hs stted tht perfrmnce stndrds shuld hve fur chrcteristics: They shuld be tied t bjectives (desired utcmes) nd shw the degree t which desired results re chieved.

36 Anlysis f TAP 00-15: Wht Ws Accmplished 21 They shuld be limited t vitl few essentil fr decisinmking. They shuld be respnsive t multiple pririties in rder t shw blnce crss cmpeting demnds (e.g., cst nd qulity). They shuld be in rder f respnsibility linked t estblish ccuntbility fr results. Given perfrmnce stndrds tht meet these chrcteristics, n rgniztin cn cllect dt (using the relevnt metric r scle) tht re sufficiently cmplete, ccurte, nd cnsistent t be useful. Perfrmnce stndrds cntined in TAP were flwed when judged by these chrcteristics nd, cnsequently, were neither useful nr usble. Exmples f sme f these stndrds re sttements such s "prvide persnnel, equipment, mteriel" r "prvide resurces." These very generl sttements re nt tied t utcmes, nr d they shw the degree t which the desired results (utcmes, utputs) re chieved. They my r my nt shw the degree t which inputs re prvided. There re 1,248 perfrmnce stndrds in TAP 00-15, which certinly ppers t be mre thn the vitl few. It is nt cler tht they respnd t multiple pririties r hve respnsibilities linked t them. Defining perfrmnce stndrds tht meet the chrcteristics nd llw fr cmplete, ccurte, nd cnsistent dt (using the relevnt metric r scle) t be cllected t ssess results is esier sid thn dne. The next chpter ffers sme suggestins t guide cntinuing effrts in this re. Initil Resurcing Guidnce: APGM nd Its Use There were few prblems with the sectin f TAP tht prvides the initil resurcing guidnce. Title 10, r institutinl, functins were very well rticulted nd understd, s wuld be expected given tht the Army hs emplyed this pprch fr sme time. Sme ctin fficers n the Army Stff wnted t merge the Army Prgrm Guidnce Memrndum (APGM) with TAP. TAP prvides the initil prgrmming guidnce tht lys ut the key Army plnning bjectives (Sectin 1) nd the demnd fr pertinl cpbili-

37 22 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse ties (Sectin 2). Sectin 3 shuld prvide the initil institutinl r PEG guidnce. Histriclly cvering PEG gls, resurce bjectives, tsks, nd pririties, the APGM hs been seprte dcument tht cntins the finl prgrmming guidnce tht immeditely prceeds the beginning f the prgrm (POM) build. It is nt cnsidered prt f TAP. The greement ws reched in the develpment f TAP tht its Sectin 3 wuld cntin the initil detiled PEG guidnce nd tht subsequent APGM wuld prvide the finl prgrmming guidnce. Thus, Sectin 3 nd the APGM were t be clled APGM I (Sectin 3 f TAP) nd APGM II (Finl Prgrmming Guidnce) respectively.

38 Chpter Five REVISING TAP This chpter describes three pprches fr mdifying TAP nd ur ssessment f the pprches in cnfrmnce with the spnsr's guidnce. It explres severl pprches fr refining the MAs nd subrdinte levels fr TAP The first prt f this chpter describes three pprches t refining the MAs: (1) Refine the current bseline (preserve definitins nd existing MAs; mke the structure mre hierrchicl nd refine the plcement f tsks nd cpbilities. (2) Chnge the structure f the current bseline (chnge definitins nd MAs; mke hierrchicl nd refine the plcement f tsks nd cpbilities). (3) Crete hybrid (using insights gined frm the first tw pprches). These re fllwed by suggestins but perfrmnce mesures; we treted these seprtely becuse they culd pply t ny f the three pprches. APPROACH 1: REFINE THE CURRENT BASELINE The first pprch prceeded MA by MA thrugh ll 10 in the existing dtbse. We mved tsks tht did nt seem t fit the MA; we eliminted redundnt pertinl tsks nd their pertinl cpbilities; we demted nd eliminted subrdinte pertinl tsks nd then eliminted remining redundnt pertinl cpbilities. We did nt chnge definitins, rewrite tsk r cpbility sttements, ggregte (grup severl int ne higher level), disggregte (brek ne int severl), r cnslidte (merge int ne) ny elements. We did nt check tsks fr cmpleteness ginst MAs, nr did we check cpbilities fr cmpleteness r perbility ginst tsks. Rther we fcused n clrifying ctegries nd their functins. Tble 5.1 pr- 23

39 24 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse vides n exmple f hw we refined the hierrchy in ne MA, Cnduct Pecetime Opertins. After refining the MAs, we ssessed the results ginst the criteri discussed in Chpter Fur. Ten MAs were still t mny nd f the wrng type fr explining the Army t externl udiences. Nr were they useful s cllectrs f pertinl cpbilities. The pertinl tsks nd cpbilities were generlly nt cmplete in tht they lcked dctrinl bsis nd needed better sttements t be mre understndble nd useful. Mrever, dditinl nd different pertinl tsks nd pertinl cpbilities were needed. It ppered tht sme tsks culd be elevted r ggregted int higher level. We pruned the number f tsks frm 122 t 74 nd the number f pertinl cpbilities frm 789 t 467, but the numbers were still t lrge. We believe we hd eliminted redundncy mng the pertinl tsks nd cpbilities thrughut the hierrchy, mking it smewht mre perble. Hwever, they were still nt mesurble in tht there were few bjective nd mesurble expecttins inherent in them. Tble 5.1 Refining Cnduct Pecetime Opertins Missin Are Opertinl Tsks Actin Reduce will f ppnent t fight Keep Cnstruct, mintin, r repir required infrstructure Keep Cntrl mvement within nd crss brders utside Keep cntinentl United Sttes (ONUS) Assist in mintining civil rder Keep Supprt ctivities f nn-gvernmentl rgniztins Keep Emply ttl frce Eliminte (redundnt) Secure electrl ctivities Subrdinte Cnduct pst-hstility pertins Mve t ther MA Suppress r destry ppsing ir defenses nd Mve t ther MA cmmnd, cntrl, cmmunictins, cmputer, nd intelligence (C4I) Acquire nd disseminte intelligence but ppsing Mve t ther MA frce

40 Revising TAP APPROACH 2: CHANGE THE STRUCTURE OF THE CURRENT BASELINE The secnd pprch hd three cmpnents. First, we revised the txnmy f the MA by elevting pertinl cpbilities bve the tsk level nd by dding new level bemfeen the pertinl cpbility nd the MA, the pertinl bjectiverwe prvided t the Army exmples f pertinl bjectives. We then crfted new definitins fr MA, pertinl cpbility, nd pertinl tsk. A revised txnmy ppers belw. Missin Are: Opertinl bjective: Opertinl cpbility: Opertinl tsk: Win the Lnd Bttle Dminte enemy frces in theter Prvide frces nd equipment t secure LOC Mintin rer re security Since we hd creted new level nd ltered the subrdintin f the ld ne by switching pertinl tsks nd cpbilities, we prepred new set f definitins fr ech level f the hierrchy. These re s fllws: Cmpnent f Missin Are Missin Are Opertinl bjective Opertinl cpbility Opertinl tsk Wht It Des Explins why the Army exists nd tells wht it des. Outlines wht the Army must d t supprt CINC missins, nd cllects pertinl bjectives. Describes in gl r bjective_sttement f wht the pertinl Army must d t meet CINC needs. Grups pertinl cpbilities lgiclly. Defines brd pertinl ctivities the Army hs t perfrm t ccmplish pertinl bjectives. Prvides the detiled ctins tht re necessry t prduce the pertinl cpbility. Prvides specific units f effrt tht cn be mesured in terms f time cst nd thrughput. Answers the wht, when, where, nd hw-much questins nd prvides the requirements fr resurces.

41 26 Imprving Army PPBES: The Plnning Phse Armed with this hierrchy nd new set f definitins, we prvided exmples f pertinl bjectives. Fr exmple, under the MA Win the Lnd Bttle, we dded the pertinl bjectives f "dminte enemy frces in theter," "frce entry int theter," nd "degrde ppsing stcks nd infrstructure." We ls ressessed the MAs, eliminting thse tht did nt pertin directly t pertinl missins nd eliminting r mving their sscited pertinl tsks. Fr exmple, under the MA Win the Lnd Bttle, we eliminted such tsks s "cnduct civil militry pertins," "cnduct ppsed mphibius lndings," nd "cnduct ppsed irbrne ssults." We mved cpbilities tht did nt fit with pertinl bjectives nd cnslidted r eliminted subrdinte r redundnt cpbilities nd tsks. Finlly, we demted pertinl tsks within the hierrchy t fit under the remining pertinl cpbilities. Hwever, in this pprch we did nt crete the full level f pertinl bjectives nr rewrite pertinl cpbility r tsk sttements. We did nt ggregte r disggregte. We did nt check cpbilities fr cmpleteness ginst MAs r check tsks fr cmpleteness r perbility ginst cpbilities. We prvided new rdering f existing dt bsed n spnsr guidnce; therefre we did nt prvide new cmplete txnmy. This pprch resulted in the reductin f the MAs t seven tht ppered t be useful. We hd suggested sme pertinl bjectives becuse tht level in the prpsed hierrchy ws missing. The pertinl tsks nd cpbilities hd the sme deficiencies utlined in the first pprch with ne exceptin: they were fewer. We hd pruned the number t 52 cpbilities nd 374 tsks. APPROACH 3: CREATE A HYBRID DERR/ED FROM THE EXISTING BASELINE The lst pprch ws hybrid. Essentilly, we used the best f the bseline nd the tw pprches bve nd put tgether suggested hierrchy. Severl cmbintins were pssible, nd we prceeded in n itertive fshin, testing severl ginst the criteri, until ne emerged s "best." Best is in quttin mrks becuse it is but strwmn nd cn be mde better by Army experts. We prpse

42 Revising TAP hierrchy f MAs, pertinl bjectives, nd pertinl cpbilities s defined bve. We ls suggest hw nd when MA nlyses might be mde s prt f the resurcing prcess. We nte up frnt tht the hierrchy we utline is nt cmplete becuse the levels f bjectives nd cpbilities hve nt been fully set frth. Missin Ares MAs elbrte the implictins fr the Army in prviding pertinl cpbilities t meet jint demnds. They prvide greter specificity s t hw the Army will meet the demnds creted by ntinl strtegies, defense guidnce, nd brd nd cntinuing CINC missins thrugh the Army's visin nd cre cmpetency. The MAs shuld llw ssessment f whether ech ws r is being chieved (GPRA; OMB Circ A-11). MAs nd bjectives re smething t be ccmplished t prticulr mments ver the plnning hrizn. We derived suggested list f MAs frm ntinl security nd defense literture nd frm sttements by Army leders: 1 Prmte Reginl Stbility Deter r Reduce Cnflicts r Threts Fight nd Win Mjr Theter Wrs Cnduct Smller-Scle Cntingency Opertins Secure the Hmelnd Prepre Frces nd Prvide Cpbilities Explit Cncept Innvtin nd Mdernize Frces Accrdingly An udit tril fr these MAs is cntined in Appendix C. *We rergnized the first five MAs frm the DPG. The lst 2 MAs were dded by request frm the spnsr t ensure tht the MA structure wuld cver ll the resurces f the Army. The prject did nt endrse this request. Subsequently, the fllwing seven MAs were decided upn by the Army in ASPG '99: Prmte Reginl Stbility; Reduce Ptentil Cnflicts nd Threts; Deter Aggressin nd Cercin; Cnduct Smller-Scle Cntingency (SSC) Opertins; Deply, Fight, nd Win Mjr Theter Wrs (MTWs); Secure the Hmelnd; nd Prvide Dmestic Supprt t Civil Authrities.