Military Transformation Clear Leadership Accountability And Management Tools Are Needed To Enhance Dods Efforts To Transform Military Capabilities Report To Congressional Committees

Because future threats the nation may face are uncertain, and with many competing demands on its resources, the Department of Defense (DoD) has begun to transform its military capabilities. This transformation will involve not only the acquisition of new weapon systems, but also the ways in which the Armed Forces think, train, and fight. In 2003, DoD estimated that $263 billion would be allocated from fiscal years 2004 through 2009 for transformation efforts. In this report, GAO does the following: (1) describes DoD's strategy to transform joint military capabilities; (2) assesses the extent to which DoD has established clear leadership, accountability, and a mechanism to integrate transformation efforts; and (3) assesses the extent to which DoD's framework incorporates results-oriented management tools to guide transformation efforts. GAO makes recommendations designed to establish clear leadership, accountability, and a more results-oriented management framework to guide DoD's transformation of military capabilities. In oral comments, the Office of Force Transformation disagreed with these recommendations but did not address the weaknesses described in this report or provide convincing evidence to show the recommendations are not warranted. Therefore, GAO continues to believe the recommendations are appropriate.

Defense Transformation: Clear Leadership, Accountability, and Management Tools Are Needed to Enhance DOD's Efforts to Transform Military Capabilities

The Department of Defense (DOD) considers the transformation1 of the U.S. military a strategic imperative to meet the security challenges of the new century. In October 1998, DOD established a joint concept development and experimentation program to provide the engine of change for this transformation. The U.S. Joint Forces Command, the executive agent of the program, carries out experiments-with support from the military services, the combatant commands, and other DOD organizations-to explore and analyze new joint operational and organizational concepts. The experiments can include studies and analyses, conferences, workshops, seminars, war games, and simulated or live field experiments. On the basis of these experiments, the Joint Forces Command recommends changes aimed at achieving significant improvements in joint capabilities. The Joint Requirements Oversight Council2 reviews the Command's recommendations, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is responsible for approving them. The Council also oversees the implementation of approved recommendations. The cumulative changes are expected to contribute to the way U.S. military forces are transformed. In November 2001, DOD also created an Office of Force Transformation to foster innovation and experimentation and assist the Secretary of Defense to develop guidance and identify strategies and policies for transformation. Because of the central role DOD's joint experimentation program plays in military transformation, we reviewed related activities to determine whether changes are needed to improve the program's ability to focus on future joint operations, military transformation, and the rapid integration of results.

To increase the range of options available to the President, the Department of Defense (DOD) is taking steps to develop a portfolio of capabilities, referred to as global strike, to rapidly plan and deliver limited duration and extended range precision strikes against highly valued assets. GAO was asked to assess (1) whether DOD has clearly defined and instilled a common understanding and approach for global strike throughout the department, (2) the extent to which DOD has developed capabilities needed for global strike, and (3) the extent to which DOD has identified the funding requirements and developed an investment strategy for acquiring new global strike capabilities. GAO reviewed and analyzed plans and studies within DOD, the services, and several commands on global strike implementation and capabilities development. DOD has taken a number of steps to implement its global strike concept and has generally assigned responsibilities for the planning, execution, and support of global strike operations. However, key stakeholders, particularly the geographic combatant commanders, have different interpretations of the concept, scope, range, and potential use of capabilities needed to implement global strike. Several factors affect the understanding and communication of DOD's global strike concept among key stakeholders, including the extent to which DOD has (1) defined global strike, (2) incorporated global strike into joint doctrine, (3) conducted outreach and communication activities with key stakeholders, and (4) involved stakeholders in joint exercises and other training involving global strike. GAO's prior work examining successful organizational transformations shows the necessity to communicate to stakeholders often and early with clear and specific objectives on what is to be achieved and what roles are assigned. Without a complete and clearly articulated concept that is well communicated and practiced with key stakeholders, DOD could encounter difficulties in fully implementing its concept and building the necessary relationships for carrying out global strike operations. DOD has underway or completed several global strike assessments to identify potential conventional offensive strike weapons systems, particularly those for prompt global strike, which would provide capabilities sometime after 2018. However, DOD has not fully assessed the requirements or coordinated improvements for related enabling capabilities that are critical to the planning and execution of successful global strike operations. These critical enabling capabilities include intelligence collection and dissemination, surveillance and reconnaissance, and command and control, communications, and battlefield damage assessment. Furthermore, DOD has not coordinated its efforts to improve these capabilities with potential offensive systems it intends to develop. Without fully assessing the enabling capabilities required or coordinating with other DOD studies, DOD might not make the best decision of which enabling capability to pursue in meeting global strike requirements. DOD has not yet established a prioritized investment strategy that integrates its efforts to assess global strike options and makes choices among alternatives given the department's long-term fiscal challenges. GAO's prior work has shown that a long-term and comprehensive investment approach is an important tool in an organization's decision-making process to define direction, establish priorities, assist with current and future budgets, and plan the actions needed to achieve goals. While DOD studies and officials recognize a need for a broad, holistic view of global strike development, DOD has not identified and assessed all global-strike-related capabilities and technologies and has not explained how its plans to link long-term studies to identify potential weapons systems will result in a comprehensive prioritized investment strategy for global strike.

" While DOD maintains military forces with unparalleled capabilities, it continues to confront management weaknesses related to its business functions that support these forces. GAO designated DOD's approach to business transformation as high risk in 2005 because DOD had not taken steps to achieve business reform on a strategic, department-wide basis. This report (1) describes the roles and responsibilities established by DOD and the military departments for overseeing business transformation and the continuity of leadership in senior business transformation positions, (2) assesses the extent to which DOD has coordinated with the military departments to align strategic planning efforts for business transformation, and (3) evaluates the extent to which the DOD DCMO has used the Defense Business Council to effectively monitor department-wide performance. GAO reviewed documentation, including summaries from Defense Business Council meetings, and interviewed cognizant officials. "