Q&A: Commanding General Ann E. Dunwoody

LOGISTICS LEADER:
Leveraging an Enterprise Approach to
Transform the Institutional Army



General Ann E. Dunwoody
Commanding General
U.S. Army Materiel Command

Dunwoody received a direct commission as a Quartermaster officer in 1975, after graduating from the State University of New York at Cortland. She later earned a Master of Science in logistics management from the Florida Institute of Technology in 1988 and a Master of Science in national resource strategy from the Industrial College of the Armed Forces in 1995.

Her command assignments include: the 226th Maintenance Company, Fort Sill, Okla.; 5th QM Detachment (ABN) Kaiserslautern, Germany; the 407th Supply and Service Battalion/ 782nd Main Support Battalion (MSB) Fort Bragg, N.C.; the 10th Division Support Command (DISCOM) Fort Drum, N.Y.; the 1st Corps Support Command Fort Bragg, N.C.; the Military Traffic Management Command (MTMC)/Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC) Alexandria, Va.; and the Combined Arms Support Command (CASCOM), Fort Lee, Va. She most recently served as AMC’s Deputy Commanding General.

Her key staff assignments include 82nd Division Parachute officer; strategic planner for the Chief of Staff of the Army (CSA); executive officer to the director, Defense Logistics Agency; and deputy chief of staff for Logistics G-4. She deployed with the 82nd as the division parachute officer for Desert Shield and Desert Storm from September 1990 to March 1991, and in 2001, as 1st COSCOM commander, she deployed the Log Task Force in support of OEF1 and stood up the Joint Logistics Command in Uzbekistan in support of CJTF-180. As commander of SDDC, she supported the largest deployment and redeployment of U.S. forces since WWII.

Her awards and decorations include: the Distinguished Service Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster; Defense Superior Service Medal; Legion of Merit with two Oak Leaf Clusters; Defense Meritorious Service Medal; Meritorious Service Medal with Silver Oak Leaf Cluster; Army Commendation Medal; the Army Achievement Medal; the National Defense Service Medal with Bronze Star; SWASM (2 campaign stars); and the Kuwait Liberation Medal. Her badges include the Master Parachutist Badge and the Parachute Rigger Badge.

She was recognized as a 2001 Distinguished Alumni for Cortland State SUNY, designated as the 2004 recipient of the National Defense Transportation Association’s DoD Distinguished Service Award, and was the 2007 recipient of Military Order of the World Wars (MOWW) Distinguished Service Award.

General Dunwoody was interviewed by MLF Editor Christian Sheehy.

Q: What do you feel are some of the key challenges facing the Army today, and how is the Army meeting those?

A: Our all-volunteer Army is being stressed as never before. Our soldiers are asked to achieve the impossible—every day. The cumulative effect of fighting two wars has pulled the Army out of balance. Adding to this complex picture, an aging infrastructure is diminishing the resilience and flexibility of our industrial base. Despite these unprecedented challenges, the way forward is clear; the surest path to the necessary transformation of the Army is the adoption of a comprehensive enterprise approach.

Decentralized decision-making and execution is shifting to four core enterprises: personnel, readiness, materiel, and services and infrastructure. This four-pronged structure fosters flexible processes to ensure greater responsiveness. The materiel enterprise and the processes created to serve the enterprise are enabling better planning, increased speed, essential integration and a greater awareness of our capabilities from concept to combat.

The more inclusive viewpoint offered by the Army Enterprise is the most effective and efficient means to sustain our joint forces, generate trained and ready units while improving the quality of life for our soldiers and their families. The Army Materiel Command [AMC], in partnership with the assistant secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology [ASA(ALT)], is now viewing research, acquisition, logistics and technology through an enterprise lens, which offers a holistic view of the entire process. As the materiel enterprise gains momentum, AMC is continuing the transformation by adapting our life cycle managers, creating the conditions for better decisions, re-calibrating our strategic objectives, encouraging a shift to a cost culture and ensuring organizational governance.

Q: What is the scope and scale of the materiel enterprise?

A: If we are to change our way of thinking it is helpful to understand the scale and scope of our enterprise. Compare AMC to a range of multi-national corporations; our more than 61,000 employees, the additional 78,000 contractors in Southwest Asia, a $47 billion budget and $104 billion in contract obligations, it would place us squarely in the Fortune 100 listing, between the 48th and 49th positions.

AMC has major operations—depots, arsenals, laboratories and installations as well as access to ports and terminals—in 149 locations. The organization’s footprint is a sprawling network that includes 36 states and maintains or supports operations in 55 countries.

By including ASA(ALT), the organization led by Mr. Dean Popps, with its budget of $34.4 billion, the materiel enterprise moves into the upper echelons of corporate rankings. When considered together, ASA(ALT) and AMC have a total budget of $81.5 billion—a sum that places the materiel enterprise in the upper quartile; close to number 22 on the Fortune 100 ratings table. Viewed collectively, the Army’s research, acquisition, logistics and technology capabilities are formidable and unrivaled. But the sheer scale of our organizations also argues for the need to become more efficient in the way we do business. Our global mission, multi-national responsibilities and trans-regional supply chains describe a macro-environment that is leading us in the direction of strategic unity of purpose.

Q: How do we achieve institutional adaptation?

A: We will achieve institutional adaptation through cooperation, communication and collaboration. This unified thinking will drive—is driving—improvements in how we execute Army Force Generation [ARFORGEN]—the process through which we build and generate combat power. These improvements are also dependent upon rethinking long-held assumptions and taking a series of important steps. The first step is to adapt the reset model we use for institutional support of the ARFORGEN process. The next step is fully embracing an enterprise approach and—at the same time—developing an Army-wide strategic management system. That management system incorporates a refined governance process supported by improved assessment architecture.

The adaptation of new processes is accompanied by the reforming of requirements coupled with more responsive resource procedures. These enterprise-driven steps toward institutional adaptation also help to inculcate a cost culture that rewards good stewardship. So installing the right structures and more responsive processes is leading to a necessary cultural shift.

Q: What is the impact on strategic objectives?

A: This is only goodness! We are trying to rebalance our Army, and the energy of the materiel enterprise will focus on the imperatives that will rebalance our Army: sustain, prepare, reset and transform. As a strategic framework, the materiel enterprise provides a core component designed to improve both the effectiveness and efficiency of the Army, align our institutions to support the Army of the 21st century and preserve our all-volunteer force.

The materiel enterprise offers a clear view of the business of the Army. The enterprise approach is gaining traction and is now yielding positive and measurable results in resource allocation and workload management. But it is time to look beyond the good performance picture and the forecasts of improving metrics. The enterprise approach enables our acquisition experts, logisticians, researchers and scientists—along with Army leaders at all levels—to make better-informed, more cost-effective, short-, mid- and long-term decisions. These better decisions will define transformation.

Q: How do you visualize the materiel enterprise?

A: There is no doubt we have a range of key choices to make, critically important priorities to set, and enormous opportunities to seize. The transformation is now under way.

The challenges we face grow more complex and the stakes ever higher. There is no evidence that this era of persistent conflict in which we operate is ebbing. Our soldiers can always count on the unwavering support of the United States Congress. But we cannot deny the relentless, rapid-fire changes shaping an emerging global reality; a new administration, a re-posturing of forces as we move from a drawdown in Iraq to a buildup in Afghanistan, the possibility of diminished funding levels— all taking place within an environment of asymmetrical warfare.

With those ever-shifting conditions as a backdrop, the evidence leads us to clear conclusions:

• The inclusive materiel enterprise—as a strategic platform and set of operational directives—is the right decision for the Army.

• The inclusiveness component is critical and includes ASA(ALT) and AMC, along with all institutional stakeholder organizations across the Army with core functions that support the delivery of materiel.

• Our organizations are coordinating their efforts to achieve shared goals as never before. The result is total life cycle management in its truest sense—built on the full integration of acquisition, research and development, technology and the materiel we deliver to the battlefield.

• This new level of collaboration is also enabling us to provide superior materiel solutions and state-of-the-art technologies and equipment for soldiers and civilians in theater.

• The materiel enterprise will create extraordinary opportunities to support and enable the growth of the Army and restore balance.

At the same time, the Army will play a role in sustaining and re-energizing the industrial base that is essential to safeguarding America. In theater, this commitment takes the form of robust forward capabilities, Army pre-positioned stock [APS], amplified support for heavy brigade combat teams [HBCT] and infantry brigade combat teams [IBCT].

With the enterprise approach gaining ground, we are now applying the appropriate disciplines of a business to the Army. It means making decisions in a wider context and providing our Army’s leadership with the very best information.

Q: Can you describe the Army’s new continuous reset concept?

A: Recently, the secretary of the Army, Mr. Pete Geren and chief of Staff, General George Casey, identified the need for “continuous reset”—as opposed to intermittent action or reset applied as a transitory solution. Reset prepares forces for future deployments, including rebuilding readiness, tasks required to re-integrate soldiers and families and all actions to organize, man, equip and train a unit.

The SECARMY and CSA declared their intention to adopt the enterprise model as a means to encourage an integrated approach to sustaining our Army. Attaining the CSA’s centerpiece goals requires that we make enterprise thinking the Army’s new normal where everyone is a stakeholder and all are accountable to help rebalance the Army.

One of the central tasks that AMC has undertaken is to align research, acquisition, logistics and technology with the vision of the Army Enterprise described by Secretary Geren and General Casey’s vision. To realize this vision, we are working to deepen our partnerships.

Creating new, complementary processes and governance is a massive operational, organizational and cultural undertaking. The shift is substantive and is paying dividends. The Life Cycle Management Commands: TACOM, CECOM, Aviation and Missile [AMCOM] and Joint Munitions and Lethality [JM&L]—along with their aligned PEO partners—continue to register impressive numbers.

The demands of reset require that the Army repair, replace and recapitalize its equipment. So as we reset equipment and units we must also synchronize the timing of reset with the new requirements as defined by ARFORGEN and updated Army regulations. We must not only return units to pre-deployment levels of equipment readiness, but we must also equip them at the standards required either as part of the modular Army or posture them to return to combat.

In FY08, AMC reset 33 brigade sets of equipment and is projected to do the same in FY09. In our current funding environment the question we might pose is how efficiently did we accomplish that reset without a fully evolved enterprise view? Will we be able to achieve higher levels of efficiency and even better stewardship of taxpayers’ dollars with the benefit of the steady adaptation of enterprise-inspired thinking and innovative management?

Q: Will this help to lean our business processes?

A: What happens when shared strategic goals and a cost culture begin to take root? As we have seen in the discussion of reset, measurable, scalable achievement levels are rapidly elevated. Best practices are rapidly transmitted across the enterprise and cost savings “multipliers” are achieved.

Through aggressive Lean Six Sigma programs, the Army’s performance is now equal to or better than our industry partners in some key areas. We have earned the prestigious Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award, 23 Shingo Awards and have earned numerous ISO certifications. This broad recognition represents yearly AMC achievements that validate the effectiveness and efficiency of our enterprise approach. These industrywide awards explain why corporate America now comes to us seeking best practices.

For example, a commercial industry representative visited Red River Army Depot to learn more about our Lean Six Sigma results.

Our awards and the interest from the private sector all serve to underscore our most recent efficiency rates and the aggressive nature of our budgetary stewardship. The metrics are undeniable: 

• $50 million in annual savings at L etterkenny Depot from FY06 through FY08

• $81 million in FY06–08 in savings at our Anniston Army Depot

• $26 million in annual savings at our Corpus Christi Army Depot

• $1.7 million in annual savings at the Tobyhanna Army Depot

• In terms of annual benefits, the Lean Six Sigma initiative has yielded a steady stream of year-over-year savings: $110 million in FY05, a jump to $247 million in FY06, more progress in FY07 with a total of $305 million and another increase in FY08 to $310 million.

Beyond CONUS, the materiel enterprise and our cost culture are generating greater efficiencies in theater. Through Logistics Civil Augmentation Program [LOGCAP] IV, the power of competition is being harnessed to deliver the best quality at the right price for our men and women around the world.

The MRAP, one of the most successful rapid fieldings of equipment in the Department of Defense history, has proven to save many lives on the battlefield. The armored vehicle initiative is hailed as an acquisition success. Now we must ensure the same success with materiel sustainment, refurbishment, repair and the maintaining of readiness rates in Iraq.

Our goal, with the materiel enterprise initiative, is to create an environment of collaboration. That environment establishes a fully developed enterprise approach when presented with challenges posed by MRAP sustainment. Through the materiel enterprise we gain an understanding of the total life cycle management requirements and costs. The results are enhanced speed of delivery, higher performance levels and the best value.

Q: How will this help achieve institutional adaptation and transformation?

A: The materiel enterprise is yielding improved support to deployed units—for an Army at war. Through best practices the Army is learning and transforming. As a consequence, we are faster, more agile and offer comprehensive equipment solutions to soldiers in the field. We are saving lives, and improving support to units and soldiers in the ARFORGEN process. The rapid fielding of MRAPs offers an excellent example.

We often think, act and make decisions within our own organizational boundaries, staying safely and comfortably inside our “stovepipes.” A vital, evolutionary enterprise approach requires that organizational members—at every level—take a broader perspective. Achieving transformation requires that we share information across organizational boundaries in order to make informed decisions from an enterprise perspective. Collaboration and transparency are the principles that should guide all of our actions.

Q: How do you envision the materiel enterprise governance structure?

A: The key to managing the materiel enterprise is governance. Transformation depends upon our ability to quickly respond to any and all future challenges. The materiel enterprise must rely on leaders’ willingness to interact and share information as well as encourage continuous collaboration at all levels. Organizational governance is integral to the pivotal cultural shift described earlier. That shift must be accompanied by an equally important expansion of a responsive environment based on transparency.

Internally imposed discipline is provided by a structure of interwoven boards and oversight mechanisms. That necessary governance, which includes ASA(ALT) and AMC, begins with the establishment of a three-tier structure based on review roles: an executive board to oversee the entire materiel enterprise, an operating board that ensures integration across the enterprise and execution boards that encourage functional and multi-functional coordination with program executive officers and program managers.

These boards include all stakeholders in ongoing and significant decision-making. This structure also allows for recommending policy changes to the Army Enterprise Board in order to operate more effectively and efficiently within the enterprise—an essential flow of information that is necessary for transformation. We will accelerate the transformation of AMC by adapting our life cycle managers, creating the conditions for better decisionmaking, re-calibrating our strategic objectives, encouraging a shift to a cost culture and ensuring organizational governance.

This is a journey that will be done in concert with the other Army core enterprises, the Army Enterprise Task Force and the Chief Management Office in the Secretariat and OSD. Let us not forget the fundamental reason for the institutional adaptation initiative: to help rebalance our Army and ensure we are good stewards of the taxpayers’ dollars while providing trained and ready forces to the combatant commander. ♦

Back to Top