Fly, Fight, and...Centralize?
My son keeps two old and dirty stuffed animals in the
top drawer of his dresser. They are held
together by thin lines of thread. Normally, this wouldn’t surprise anyone
except my son is nineteen and in college.
He also has his first skateboard, pieces of his first bike, and clothes
he has long outgrown. My son struggles
with change. It seems he’s not alone.
It’s one of the most publicized challenges in business. It echoes in the halls of our government and is
forced down the throat of commoners. It’s witnessed up close as a baby grows
and perceived through tears when a loved one dies. There is no getting around it. And, planning for it can feel futile: Change.
The Center for Creative Leadership said, “Today there
seems to be very little business as usual. Turbulence is common, with
organizations facing a dizzying array of changes. Your success as a leader will
very likely depend on how well you deal with such change.”
In the United States Air Force (USAF), change is a
constant. It begins with changing your
identity (basic training), changing your location (orders), and changing your
job (policy and promotions). One of the most significant changes I experienced
in twenty years of active service in the USAF occurred from 1997 through
2000.
Prior to 1997, USAF logistics operated under a
decentralized concept. In short,
supply-related support functions were managed and conducted at base-level by
large supply squadrons. However, in 1997
Air Combat Command (ACC) directed all combat-coded bases to centralize their
supply functions to one location. That
meant, the primary support functions normally conducted by hundreds of AF men,
women, and civilians would be transferred to a central location (out of their
control and off their base) and managed via Internet, email, and a centralized
computer operating center. Supply
personnel were speechless while maintenance leadership was screaming.
ACC stood up a supply center known as the Regional
Supply Squadron (RSS) at Langley AFB in Virginia. With one-third of the personnel, the RSS
assumed responsibility for the bulk of supply tasks at 19 active bases. I was a member of the “advon-team” and acted
as “practitioner” visiting each bases and briefing senior leadership on the
transition. Our motto hitting the ground
was, “We promise as good or better
support.”
Transferring all supply functions to another location
meant senior leadership at the Air Force bases would not have access to a “warm
body” and would be unable to reach out and touch when support was less than expected. Most metrics and measurement tools would be
viewed and accessed over a central database.
Leaders struggled with the concept of dedicated support,
sortie-generation success, and the lack of loyalty focused on their local needs.
As practitioner, developing the relationship with
senior leaders during the visits and assuaging their fears proved to be an
important determinant of our success or failure in regionalizing supply processes. Brown (2011) stated, “The exchange of
expectations and obligations (the formation of a psychological contract)
depends to a great degree upon a good first impression or match between the
client (AF base) and the practitioner (ACC)” (p. 15).
In discussing the action research model, Brown (2011)
said, “The manager also needs to be aware of the processes that should be
considered when one is attempting to create change” (p. 15). As we demonstrated how the new processes would
function, we maintained sensitive to their fears and concerns. Little by little, both senior leaders and
younger airmen began to accept the regionalization concept and even believe it
may work.
However, even though many began to believe, many more
remained pessimistic. We heard comments
such as, “It will never work.” “The aircraft will be grounded all over the
country.” “How will anyone get answers?” “The project is going to fail!” We
continued to demonstrate an empathic resolve and identified that the process
was already working on a smaller scale at Langley by supporting deployed
locations overseas.
While the pessimist was unwilling to give the idea credence,
the pragmatist tried to dissect the concept by picking apart the processes. They
refused to envision any possibilities that operations could function at
heightened levels from a central location. Brown (2011) said, “Question the
client’s diagnosis of the problem, because the client’s perspective may be
biased” (p. 16). As a result of the
pessimism and pragmatism, we continued to move forward with vision of a
streamlined operations promising exceptional support. With strong leadership from headquarters, a
governmental directive to reduce personnel and money, the regional concept
proved to be the best way forward.
So we proceeded.
One base a month. The RSS assumed
responsibility for all routine and priority orders. They inherited the functions of records
maintenance, stock control, funds, and the most critical supply function at a
base: Mission Capability Section responsible for chasing parts for grounded
aircraft. It wasn’t easy. There were hour-long phone calls and daily
video teleconferences. In the end, it
worked. Air Force logistics support is now
managed by two regional supply centers.
Change started with a command from the Pentagon:
reduce defense spending and service manpower. Over 15 years later the RSS has
evolved into a central supply center housing over 200 people responsible for
managing aircraft all over the globe.
What started as a practitioner and client discussion for streamlining
supply functions has grown into a global logistics supercenter.
Retired for nearly a decade and working alongside supply people as a Lockheed contractor, I still get to witness the continuing
change of USAF supply. It’s funny, young
supply airmen often come into my office and talk about how their jobs have
changed in the past year. Leaning back
in my chair I smile and ask, “Is that right? Please, tell me about it.”
Legacy evolves.
Steve
References:
Brown, D. (2011). An
Experiential Approach to Organizational Development. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Center for Creative Leadership. (2013). Adapting to
Organizational Change. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
No comments:
Post a Comment