Don Vs Usmc Case Study

In November 2013 the Department of the Navy (DON) Chief Information Officer (CIO) issued a memorandum of distribution titled, Department of the Navy Information Management/Information Technology/Cyberspace Strategic Objectives for Fiscal Years 2014 – 2018. This brief three page document lays out six objectives for a strategic plan for the Navy’s IM, IT, and Cyberspace interests. My paper will look at two of those objectives, reduce software application spending by 40 percent from FY13 levels and improve transparency, accountability and execution of IM/IT investments on the strategic planning and operation of the Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) environment at Naval Surface Warfare Center Panama City

The department’s leadership is responsible for providing appropriate manpower and resources to each mission using an increasingly tight budget, while also following strict laws for high priority missions, such as nuclear defense, which mandate both high levels of training and manpower (Air Education Training Command, 2015). Additionally, warfare technology has become incredibly advanced. Due to this complication, the educational and technical requirements for military service members and employees are steadily increasing.

Accountability is everything within the USMC and the work force. Once you have achieved this personality trait, there is no way anybody could have any reason no to trust you. Like John Di Lemme said "accountability separates the wishers in life from the action-takers that care enough about their future to account for their daily actions." Answerability is justifying your actions, being able to answer to the "what, when, where, why, and how?" aspect. when given a responsibility you are required to follow through with lability you are

With each passing year, current technologies continue to evolve or change while new technology or innovations emerge that, in some instances, profoundly change markets, societies, or ways of living. For all organizations, to include the military, the persistent change of technology means that organizations must also evolve and change accordingly. Based on research by Accenture’s Paul Nunes and Tim Breene in 2011, only 7 percent of companies that cease to grow ever survive over the long term, which serves as a strong warning for any organization about the need to change. In addition to technological change, the military faces many other challenges as well. The most significant challenges include budgetary constraints, mandated drawdowns in personnel strength, and numerous mission demands across the globe.

On August 2, 2011, Congress passed the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011 which cut $487 billion from projected defense spending over the next 10 years.1 The act also established a system of sequestration, which would cut an additional $495 billion from the defense budget.2 Altogether, the BCA would cut almost $1 trillion dollars from the Department of Defense (DoD). The passing of the BCA and the subsequent loss of funding mark an end to a 13-year period of robust budget allocations to support the global war on terrorism. From 2001 to 2013 over $1.6 trillion has been allocated to the DoD to support preparations for and execution of operations in various overseas areas.3 Within this $1.6 trillion, 94% of the funding was allocated to support operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.4 This robust amount of funding cultivated a culture within the DoD that there would always be funding available to cover costs at home and abroad. This culture is deeply entrenched within the United States Army due to large budgets provided to the Army over the past 13 years. In today’s environment of shrinking budgets, this culture can no longer stand true and must be changed. Establishing a cost-conscious culture (CCC) within the Army is critical to our ability to sustain the current Army force structure and make the needed modernization investments to ensure our capability to fight and win our nations wars.

I agree wholeheartedly with both you and James….and so does the Army Chief of Staff, the Army’s acquisition program and processes must become more flexible, expedited and innovative keep up with the ever changing security environment facing the U.S. and for the troops on the ground executing the mission.

My project will be a case study on how effective the USCYBERCOM has been in supporting the DoD Cyber Strategy, specifically exploring how the organization has developed and adjusted to the cyber battlefield. Additionally, I will explore what U.S can expect from the USCYBERCOM now that the organization has just recently been elevated combatant command, which comes with the responsibilities of managing its forces, being prepared to conduct operations during crises, and for training and equipping cyber forces.

In my capacity as the Director, Information Management and Systems for AMC, I served as the enterprise information operations manager worldwide (140 locations) directing over 3000 personnel programmatically and 120 (up to 200 depending on position) directly (serving as a third level supervisor). I accomplished the following: In my capacity as the Director of Information Management and Enterprise Operations, I oversaw a large personal staff and a program management staff that managed the commands geographically dispersed day-to-day enterprise IT operations. Serving as the program manager for several major IT functions throughout the command, I faced a variety of problems that included, but not limited to; a poor performing infrastructure, poor service support, lack of system engineering and planning, a Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) and several poorly designed homegrown applications developed by the individual business units. While many of my problems were standard for a large command one of the larger issues that are typically missed was a strategic approach to managing information technology holistically across a command that had seven distinct mission sets along the associated funding. As with all Army commands this command was diverse and some of the subordinate commands existed before the parent command came into existence. This translated into disparate approaches in IT solutions. The subordinate commands had

I decided to write about this essay because I believe the problem between the Peace Corps Volunteers and the Tswana farmers is remarkable. My first thought was how unfortunate and frustrating the issue must have been considering the volunteers’ ambition was only to help. I’ve personally been in this type of predicament as a volunteer in the past, but I couldn’t even imagine how it must have been on an even larger scale.

As the (Acting) Executive Director (ED) for TARDEC’s Research, Technology and Integration (RTI) business group, and in my previous role as the Deputy Executive Director (DxD) for RTI, I have created/implemented a strategic RTI S&T vision that supported the bolstered funding shifts (between $1.3 - $2B) from FY18 through the FY20-24 POM as directed by the DUSA and A/SA to the Army’s highest priority technology development areas. I’ve enabled in concert with other TARDEC senior leadership and staff, working across the NGCV CFT team, to fund efforts that maintain deliverables of technologies foundational for Next Generation of Combat Vehicles. This strategic initiative enabled TARDEC ICW the CFT to accelerate key technologies to support Army Modernization

While employed with the Army Materiel Command as Director of Strategic Planning and Technical Implementation, I served several roles one as the CTO for the Office of the Chief Information Officer and another as the enterprise architect. AMC served in a variety of roles one of which was the senior technical advisor for architecture and technology (ostensibly the CTO for the CIO). AMC, a 53 Billion dollar year logistics command that serves as the army version of amazon for the army’s current inventory of weapons, supplies and vehicles. AMC, at this time, was employing around 100 thousand-person personnel spread across 140 locations worldwide. I applied the vision and strategy to current issues within their technology infrastructure and was able to produce an analysis model that demonstrated the path forward to reduce their aged infrastructure backlog of $300M+ and reduce infrastructure operations assets by 80% using a limited annual investment ($180M+) within 4-5 years by using the infrastructure strategy to direct the replacement of the aged technology inventory. I communicated the value of these new technology solutions in terms the business executives could understand and achieved buy-in from all business stakeholders on this major strategic change. The command embraced the multi-year aggregation of their purchasing and migration efforts necessary to achieve better time-to-service, lowers costs, immediate scalability, less technical capability issues, and turn the IRS

According to the office of the Chief Information Officer (2012), the EA within the Department of Defense (DoD) tends to achieve desired capabilities to enable effective war fighting, business, and defense intelligence operations based on the DoD directives, policy, and investment decisions. In fact, combatant commanders benefit from EA during the war fighting in the organization and management of their war fighting assets (Cook, 2014). For instance, EA enhances war fighting effectiveness by providing instant situation awareness and minimizing costs in terms of ammunition and logistics assets.

Newly created Defense Chief Management Officer (DCMO) leads business transformation efforts for the DepSecDef. It should be noted that although the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) is charged with the overall operation of the DoD enterprise-level business mission, the components, comprised of the military services, defense agencies, field activities and combatant commands, are, in many ways, a collection of independent business units with different "rules of engagement" and additional lines of accountability.” (McGrath). This large and complex structure creates many challenges for the DoD.

INTRODUCTION: Innovation and disruptive technology can be life or death for a company, however, when the company owns the knowledge it is in great shape to succeed…if it can see it through the fog. We often think of innovation as new, not necessarily better, widget. Although sometimes the disruptive technology is not a new widget, it is a new way of thinking or a new way addressing an old problem. As seen in the military, widget innovation occurs the strategic level; however, the tactical level is innovative in thought and processes on a daily basis with no new widgets. If the company is perceptually seeking new and innovative ways to succeed, it seems obvious that company will flourish. Innovation is the consist recognition of a unique opportunity and Lockheed had the product, yet it was failing them…they needed something, something disruptive to help their organization change. They did not need a new widget, they needed to see something everyone else missed—a new thought model and coping strategies.

The (-- removed HTML --) understands Information Technology (IT) infrastructures are becoming more complex, virtualized, distributed, and diverse - in effect the data center has lost its walls - but organizations like USCIS need to innovate and exert the same control over this virtualized, distributed world without walls as they would exert over prior models of IT. Our years of experience have taught us Two areas of innovation the Team AC4S can lead USCIS into the future are the Software Defined Data Center and Cognitive Computing.