RLMT500 Week 3 Discussion

.docx

School

American Public University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

500

Subject

Management

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by BarristerTapirPerson186

Good afternoon fellow classmates and professor, The article by Rutner et al. (2012) compares and contrasts the development of logistics in the military and civilian environments. It highlights important changes in both sectors, where commercial logistics have been struggling with the challenges of rising mass retailers and technological innovations. Meanwhile, the struggles with military logistics was the transition from Cold War strategies to sustained combat operation in third-world environments. (Rutner et al., 2012, p. 96). The article perceives that there is a significant distinction between both types of logistics environment in terms of their progression, thought leadership, and the challenges each sector faces. The situation in the article explains that military logistics was a byproduct from the necessities of war and because logistics was first introduced in the military, it should be seen as the standard barrier for given the circumstances. However, the literature mentions that commercial logistics had surpassed military logistics due to the lack of innovation and flexibility. The authors use the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) and Theory of Organizational Design (TOD) to evaluate the behaviors that influences the change in roles, which also helped to confirm the main challenges (Rutner et al., 2012, p. 97). In addition to lack of innovation and flexibility, other military logistics challenges consisted of bureaucratic constraints and a lack of focus on standardization and control. For example, flexibility was compromised by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), which were “hidden” regulations restricting how the military executed its logistics strategy and develops its structure from having a bureaucratic mindset on operational efficiencies (Rutner et al., 2012, p. 108). In addition, USTRANSCOM was only able to support war-time initiatives and not peacetime operations, lacking standardization. Lastly, each combatant commander assigned

to specific boundaries had their own vision for their command instead of having a unified vision, which caused a lack of control for cross functional boundaries to integrate logistics activities effectively (Rutner et al., 2012, p. 108). In contrast, commercial logistics had been able to adapt to evolving market conditions and customer demands by embracing new technologies and procedures. The authors argue that these challenges were the reasons why military logistics were prevented from keeping up with the changes and advancements in the commercial sector. In addressing these challenges, the authors express the need for military logistics to adopt a more customer-centric approach, focus on incorporating technology solutions, and collaborate more with the commercial sector to learn from their past experiences and best practice for future implementation (Rutner et al., 2012, p. 101). In terms of assumptions that should be validated, it is relevant to consider the context and specific needs of military logistics. For instance, commercial logistics may prioritize market dynamic, customer satisfaction, and probability, where military logistics may also consider certain factor pertaining to national security, mission readiness, and cost efficiency. Thus, any actions taken to improve military logistics must be carefully evaluated to ensure that they align with these specific requirements. Overall, to draw accurate insights, it is important to assess the underlying assumptions and contexts for how both sectors require to operate. Nuance -Jake References

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version