How Many Dollars and How Many People for DND

[Navy_Pete]

Sorry I misunderstood "Pete". I'm hearing you now.

I can see that if you have spent a career in uniform managing contracts that your experiences are not much different than those of a civilian that has spent a career managing contracts.

But perhaps that goes to my point? If you are short of qualified bodies in the procurement field how do you find suitable, military friendly, candidates to fill the gaps?

I agree entirely with your point on MBAs and not talking to the plant floor - and that is a nation wide, if not a First World problem (a real one).

McKInsey et al keep telling the bosses that they can get you to 95% efficiency. And I keep telling whoever will listen that 70% is a much more realistic planning horizon. I don't make what McKinsey makes.

On the military side we've started to look at things like having options to get into a project management 'stream' for some of the officer occupations, which is already being done a bit haphazardly via job posting preferences and career management, but generally with the turnover it makes more sense for military pers to support dedicated civilians as the lead. That way you still have experienced folks who know the processes in the mix, with relelvant knowledge of the actual on the ground requirements and realities. I'm one of the weirdos that like contracts, so keep getting back into the ADM(Mat) world as a military guy.

The plus side is that with the vacancies and the military priority hiring program, a lot of people can jump into a civi job after a posting, but with the hiring freeze and SWE limits we generally have way more work than people, and with burnout working somewhere other than DND is a pretty appealing alternative.

On the civilian side it seems to be a long decline from DRAP, where we reduced positions with a hiring freeze, so there is a bow wave of experienced folks retiring now, a period where we weren't hiring new people, and a lot of new folks just coming up to speed now. So not uncommon to have a mix of really experienced people with really new people and not much in between, so the retirements hit pretty hard.

I don't really think there is much we can do about it at this point, as it's been building for over a decade, but we do have a lot of stuff on hold that we just can't get to, so when the organization plans around for us 'surging' to do more, I just shake my head. Our daily output is the surge, and burnout is a real and consistent issue already.

I agree with you on the efficiency; I'm not sure how to actually come up with a number, but suspect 70% would be pretty high.

We have a lot of internal churn and losses just by the GoC processes. I'm sure we spend several thousand dollars in wages though for every basic travel claim though just in admin, and it seems like buying $50 of o-rings is about the same LOE as buying $24,999 worth ($25k is still the threshold for a lot of other processes to kick in, which is really low for some items).

Little things like the mandatory GBA+ form are an annoyance in the grand scheme of things, but seems like something that anytime at all spent on things like that for random part buys is wasted, and it all adds up over the enterprise to a not-insignificant LOE spent every year on things with no actual value. Especially when it could have been either exempted for standard re-supply buys, or added onto an existing form with a checkbox for "N/A".

For context, I think a normal parts buy needs a PCC form, which covers the tech details, quantities, etc, an SRCL for the security requirements, the GBA+ form, the Indigenous procurement form, and sometimes a few other ones. Once those are all approved, that will turn into an actual RFP, which is it's own beast. Best case the various forms only need signed by the procurement officer and tech authority, but sometimes will also need other stakeholders, and can go as high as the DG (or ADM, if it's a routine buy of really expensive widgets).

Projects are their own thing, with NP and capitol ones having their own hoops, and then a lot of complications for the implementation side of things, but things that should be easy take more time than seems reasonable, so leaves less time to figure out the complicated things.

Frustrating to work in, and see a lot of internal waste as a taxpayer, but sometimes spite against the system and coffee is the motivator needed to kick some bureaucracy over the line to get parts eventually showing up in bins.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Another fun one, 3 or 4 years ago O&M funding was further broken down into two subcategories, one of which is used for accrual accounting (nicknamed 'capitalized NP', or C523).

The distinction between the two is really unclear and a lot of different interpretations, but intended to track the 'asset value' of some kind of widget.

That may make sense for a business, but given we tend to run everything until 10 years past it's obsolescence date, not realistic, and in a lot of cases doesn't account for basic scrap value, or liabilities like demilitarization, hazmat or other disposal costs. So something that probably makes sense for a general CPA looking at a business, but really just a lot of meaningless numbers in our financial system disconnected from reality.

In real terms though, resulted in a lot of confusion, delay and makes financial management side of projects/procurement even more complicated.

A lot of times you'll have beans to spend, something slips, but is the wrong kind of bean to transfer to something else that you could spend it on (but don't have the funding for). When you are talking capitol money, that was voted on by the GoC for new capability, makes sense, but having money for 'Operations and Maintenance' that you can spend on some types of O&M but not others without approval to convert it is crazy. So frustrating.

 

[FJAG]

Perhaps that is a place that the Regs could reach out more to the Reserve community for expertise?

Uniformed members, in my understanding, aren't given many professional opportunities to develop negotiating skills. Not surprising in an organization where the entire organization is built on command authority. Negotiation is not a primary requirement.

Conversely many members of the Reserves negotiate supply contracts on a daily basis. And some of them even understand some of the needs of the soldier. Or at least understand the environment well enough to be able to take instruction from those with the needs.

A civvy fleet manager that is also a Captain in the Air Force Reserve might be a good candidate for a Project Manager or Director.

I would have agreed with you once and then in 2006-2009 I became a DND Project Director on an information management program in Ottawa. What would have been a dead simple thing in private industry (and that's why I was brought on - I knew that stuff) turned out to be a maze of restrictions that defeated "dead simple" cold.

Notwithstanding the fact that I had a pretty decent project manager, a pretty close to brilliant guy at handling finances, a shit hot business analyst, a solid electronic systems engineer, and some good additional staff, the constant systemic obstacles to "acquiring" what we needed were immense. (Don't mention bilingualism or the European French within ten metres of me) We had some great victories but still managed to only deliver about half of what was in scope by the time I aged out at 60 and ran away to the lakeshore and started building an addition to my new house out of frustration. Hammers are great things for that.

Knowing the civilian industry isn't enough; you need to navigate bureaucracy as well and often it's simple unnavigateable.

 

[Kirkhill]

I would have agreed with you once and then in 2006-2009 I became a DND Project Director on an information management program in Ottawa. What would have been a dead simple thing in private industry (and that's why I was brought on - I knew that stuff) turned out to be a maze of restrictions that defeated "dead simple" cold.

Notwithstanding the fact that I had a pretty decent project manager, a pretty close to brilliant guy at handling finances, a shit hot business analyst, a solid electronic systems engineer, and some good additional staff, the constant systemic obstacles to "acquiring" what we needed were immense. (Don't mention bilingualism or the European French within ten metres of me) We had some great victories but still managed to only deliver about half of what was in scope by the time I aged out at 60 and ran away to the lakeshore and started building an addition to my new house out of frustration. Hammers are great things for that.

Knowing the civilian industry isn't enough; you need to navigate bureaucracy as well and often it's simple unnavigateable.

Waaayyyulll.....

Time for civvy plan B

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I would have agreed with you once and then in 2006-2009 I became a DND Project Director on an information management program in Ottawa. What would have been a dead simple thing in private industry (and that's why I was brought on - I knew that stuff) turned out to be a maze of restrictions that defeated "dead simple" cold.

Notwithstanding the fact that I had a pretty decent project manager, a pretty close to brilliant guy at handling finances, a shit hot business analyst, a solid electronic systems engineer, and some good additional staff, the constant systemic obstacles to "acquiring" what we needed were immense. (Don't mention bilingualism or the European French within ten metres of me) We had some great victories but still managed to only deliver about half of what was in scope by the time I aged out at 60 and ran away to the lakeshore and started building an addition to my new house out of frustration. Hammers are great things for that.

Knowing the civilian industry isn't enough; you need to navigate bureaucracy as well and often it's simple unnavigateable.

This is a national security risk in and of itself. If we are delaying capabilities solely because of Byzantine and self-licking bureaucracy; the bureaucracy needs to be carved out like a cancerous tumor.

I, unfortunately, am not naive enough to believe in the "we're cutting through red tape" fairytale espoused by governments and departments of every stripe.

 

[daftandbarmy]

On the military side we've started to look at things like having options to get into a project management 'stream' for some of the officer occupations, which is already being done a bit haphazardly via job posting preferences and career management, but generally with the turnover it makes more sense for military pers to support dedicated civilians as the lead. That way you still have experienced folks who know the processes in the mix, with relelvant knowledge of the actual on the ground requirements and realities. I'm one of the weirdos that like contracts, so keep getting back into the ADM(Mat) world as a military guy.

The plus side is that with the vacancies and the military priority hiring program, a lot of people can jump into a civi job after a posting, but with the hiring freeze and SWE limits we generally have way more work than people, and with burnout working somewhere other than DND is a pretty appealing alternative.

On the civilian side it seems to be a long decline from DRAP, where we reduced positions with a hiring freeze, so there is a bow wave of experienced folks retiring now, a period where we weren't hiring new people, and a lot of new folks just coming up to speed now. So not uncommon to have a mix of really experienced people with really new people and not much in between, so the retirements hit pretty hard.

I don't really think there is much we can do about it at this point, as it's been building for over a decade, but we do have a lot of stuff on hold that we just can't get to, so when the organization plans around for us 'surging' to do more, I just shake my head. Our daily output is the surge, and burnout is a real and consistent issue already.

I agree with you on the efficiency; I'm not sure how to actually come up with a number, but suspect 70% would be pretty high.

We have a lot of internal churn and losses just by the GoC processes. I'm sure we spend several thousand dollars in wages though for every basic travel claim though just in admin, and it seems like buying $50 of o-rings is about the same LOE as buying $24,999 worth ($25k is still the threshold for a lot of other processes to kick in, which is really low for some items).

Little things like the mandatory GBA+ form are an annoyance in the grand scheme of things, but seems like something that anytime at all spent on things like that for random part buys is wasted, and it all adds up over the enterprise to a not-insignificant LOE spent every year on things with no actual value. Especially when it could have been either exempted for standard re-supply buys, or added onto an existing form with a checkbox for "N/A".

For context, I think a normal parts buy needs a PCC form, which covers the tech details, quantities, etc, an SRCL for the security requirements, the GBA+ form, the Indigenous procurement form, and sometimes a few other ones. Once those are all approved, that will turn into an actual RFP, which is it's own beast. Best case the various forms only need signed by the procurement officer and tech authority, but sometimes will also need other stakeholders, and can go as high as the DG (or ADM, if it's a routine buy of really expensive widgets).

Projects are their own thing, with NP and capitol ones having their own hoops, and then a lot of complications for the implementation side of things, but things that should be easy take more time than seems reasonable, so leaves less time to figure out the complicated things.

Frustrating to work in, and see a lot of internal waste as a taxpayer, but sometimes spite against the system and coffee is the motivator needed to kick some bureaucracy over the line to get parts eventually showing up in bins.

"A bad system will beat a good person every time." Dr. W Edwards Deming

 

[dimsum]

"A bad system will beat a good person every time." Dr. W Edwards Deming

Flashbacks of Red Bead experiment

 

[Navy_Pete]

@FJAG I always wonder how I would fair on the civvie side for that reason. I think if I can still get stuff done despite the restrictions I'm probably reasonably competent.

I'd probably be deeply suspicious if something was actually simple and straightforward though, bit like some kind of rat conditioned by those electric shocks in experiments.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Flashbacks of Red Bead experiment

Maybe there should be a promotion related test related to beads. It might make a bigger difference

 

[Kirkhill]

a bow wave of experienced folks retiring now, a period where we weren't hiring new people, and a lot of new folks just coming up to speed now. So not uncommon to have a mix of really experienced people with really new people and not much in between, so the retirements hit pretty hard.

This line struck home.

How do you manage the young/old dichotomy? Do you intentionally pair juniors and seniors on single projects? Or do you let juniors do "simple" projects their way while seniors work on "important" projects in their own style?

I agree with you on the efficiency; I'm not sure how to actually come up with a number, but suspect 70% would be pretty high.

A number is a number and means absolutely nothing outside the context of the particular calculation and analysis. They are useful for monitoring change to reflect the impact of changing assumptions and policies. As a mentor of my own once asked "What number do you want?" He could create that number by adjusting the algorithm and the assumptions.

I choose the number because it appears to be a common starting point for most efficiency exercises I have been exposed to. It is the number that seems to shake out "naturally" from from the first review of project assumptions and the first iteration before any "reforms" kick in. It also resonates with me because most people are not A students. If you end up with a B average in your working population I think HR has been doing pretty well. As well, most efforts that I have witnessed to manage productivity suggests that it is a struggle for individuals to maintain a 70% level of productivity. A lot of that is up to the capability of the individual and other stressors in their private lives. But a bigger problem is management underestimating how much work they actually have. By that I mean that when management cuts their employees free and assigns Responsibility, Authority and Budget and lets the employee get on with the tasks assigned the tendency of the employee is to get on with the task, get it completed and get back to worrying about their family. And worrying about what the next task will look like when management assigns it.

I have been told on a number of occasions that 70% of hours are to be productive hours, billable hours. That is always a stretch. There is seldom as much billable work as management wishes. Meanwhile there is a lot more administrative and training hours than they are happy to admit. And there is always slack time - because people are people and not machines. And my own feeling is that most improvement and innovation occurs during those slack time conversations. Another reason I am not a fan of remote work. Companies need their people to socialize in a relaxed environment.

 

[Kirkhill]

@FJAG I always wonder how I would fair on the civvie side for that reason. I think if I can still get stuff done despite the restrictions I'm probably reasonably competent.

I'd probably be deeply suspicious if something was actually simple and straightforward though, bit like some kind of rat conditioned by those electric shocks in experiments.

Another ancient truism always applies:

"It's not what you know. It's who you know."

 

[FJAG]

@FJAG I always wonder how I would fair on the civvie side for that reason. I think if I can still get stuff done despite the restrictions I'm probably reasonably competent.

I'd probably be deeply suspicious if something was actually simple and straightforward though, bit like some kind of rat conditioned by those electric shocks in experiments.

I can't speak for everyone, but I think both my military and legal training stood me in good stead to handle most things.

The military taught me confidence and how to rely on both myself and others, how to work as part of a team and gave me a good start on analytic thought. The legal education built on analysis as well as evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of both your own side and your opponents.

That works really well in the civilian world when you try to develop a plan of action to solve a particular problem. Most military folks have a knack for that.

I've found generally on civilian projects most organizations give you an objective to meet and a budget/resources and then get on with their own job and generally don't try to micro manage you. That's where government comes down with a problem in that most projects are micromanaged from above either by a micromanaging boss, (my biggest gripe as a RegF lieutenant was how much time 35-year-old majors spent telling 20-year-old lieutenants that it was time to get a haircut - when it came to shooting guns they weren't to be seen) or by a system that is set up with so many checks and balances that it essentially micromanages you and robs you of many valuable hours of productive work to meet oversight.

I find many of @dapaterson's comments about SRBs, and so on, interesting in that I believe him that many projects seem to be poorly managed and need that oversight. The trouble with any system like this is that it doesn't distinguish between good and bad managers. It puts the hoops in place for everyone to jump through.

My project was an ADM(IM) one and it worked well because much of the team came from the IM side and project management side of the house. My role was basically subject matter expert/project director, focusing direction of effort, directing the business analyst, identifying requirements and preparing for business transformation. The ADM(IM) folks dealt with all the heavy lifting on the project oversight. I'm not sure if every project has a project management team with as much familiarity in their field as mine did, but it sure made my life easy notwithstanding the constant frustrations we had to deal with. The old ... "learn to accept the things you can't change" mantra helped but it sure made me long for civvy street where and the days when I could just make a decision, write a check and watch things happen.