Order 4939837 RESTRUCTURING PLAN FOR THE MINUTEMAN III SYSTEMS DIRECTORATE

docx

School

Harvard University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

115

Subject

Civil Engineering

Date

Nov 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by ChefLionPerson597

1 Restructuring Plan for the Minuteman III Systems Directorate Student Name Institutional Affiliations Facilitator Course Date

2 Restructuring Plan for the Minuteman III Systems Directorate Introduction The Air Force's organization and manpower structure have changed dramatically during the last few decades. This is due to the need to adapt to the modern environment, which is characterized by new challenges, technologies and regulations. The Minuteman III System Directorate (MMSD) manages and operates the Minuteman III missile defense system, a nuclear weapons system owned and operated by the US Air Force. The MMSD is tasked with managing the maintenance and upkeep of the system, as well as overseeing the training and development of personnel involved in the system's operation. The system is composed of several components, including launch platforms, ground-based radar, and air-to- ground communication links. The MMSD must ensure that all of these components are functioning properly and that personnel are properly trained and qualified to operate the system. The MMSD is also responsible for ensuring that the system meets all safety and security requirements. As the complexity and sophistication of the system increases, the MMSD must develop and implement a restructuring plan to ensure the system is properly managed and maintained. The restructuring of the Minuteman III Systems Directorate (MMSD) requires a comprehensive review of the current manning within the organization. The literature related to the restructuring of the Minuteman III System Directorate's manning is extensive, but much of it focuses on particular areas such as the Air Force budget, personnel management, and organizational structure. This paper will review the existing literature on the restructuring of defence systems, focusing on the Minuteman III system, to identify potential areas for improvement and recommend a restructuring plan for the MMSD. Overview of the Minuteman III Systems Directorate and its Current Manning System The Minuteman III Systems Directorate is a diverse organization that is part of the U.S. Air Force. It is responsible for various activities, including managing and operating

3 missile launches, aircraft maintenance, and logistics systems. The Minuteman III Systems Directorate is composed of a variety of personnel, from enlisted personnel to officers and from civilian personnel to contractors. The organization is divided into two main components: the Command and Control Directorate and the Operations Directorate. The Command and Control Directorate is responsible for the management of the Minuteman III systems, while the Operations Directorate is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the systems. The Minuteman III Systems Directorate currently utilizes a personnel system that is based on a military rank structure. The personnel system consists of several ranks, from enlisted personnel to officers. All personnel, regardless of rank, are required to adhere to the same standards and regulations. Additionally, the personnel system is divided into two main categories: full-time and part-time personnel. Full-time personnel are employed by the Minuteman III Systems Directorate on a full-time basis, while part-time personnel are those the Minuteman III Systems Directorate employs on a part-time basis. In order to ensure the effective and efficient management of the Minuteman III program, the MMSD must be structured and manned appropriately. The literature on the U.S. defence industry has focused on the need for a comprehensive approach to managing personnel to ensure the military's operational demands are met. Given the inadequacies of the current structure of the MMSD, there is a need for restructuring of the MMSD. Tripp et al. (2012) suggest that the restructuring of the MMSD should focus on increasing organizational agility and flexibility. Snyder et al. (2013) suggest that the restructuring of the MMSD should focus on improving the organization's operational efficiency. Additionally, Larkins (2021) suggests that restructuring the MMSD should focus on improving the organization's ability to rapidly adapt to Air Force's mission changes or to rapid technological advances.

Your preview ends here

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

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 Gholz and Sapolsky (1999) argued that the U.S. defense industry must focus on restructuring in order to manage personnel better. They suggested that the U.S. defense industry should focus on developing new organizations, processes, and technologies to ensure the military the personnel it requires to meet its operational demands. Sneed and Kilmer's (2012) literature suggests that the Air Force should focus on developing and executing manpower plans to ensure that it has the personnel it needs to meet its operational demands. Sundberg (2013 that the Air Force should focus on developing new organizations, processes, and technologies to ensure the military has personnel it requires operational demands. Air Force Manpower Requirements and Component Mix The United States Air Force has been restructuring to improve its manning and ensure its forces' readiness. This restructuring process has been implemented in various ways, with the most notable being the Air Force Reorganization Plan of 2013 (Sundberg, 2013). The plan sought to reduce the number of personnel and personnel-related costs while at the same time improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the force. The plan was implemented through various measures, such as the consolidation of certain roles, the streamlining of processes, and the reduction of overhead costs. The plan also sought to reduce the number of personnel in some areas to create a more balanced mix of personnel and resources. The literature on Air Force workforce requirements and the component mix has focused primarily on the need for an agile combat support system. Robbert et al. (2014) explored the challenges of developing an agile combat support system, noting the need for flexible, rapidly deployable, and rapidly reconfigurable forces. The authors argued that this is a challenge due to the "complexity of the operating environment and the need to maintain a balance between combat support and combat operations. The authors explored three different options for managing personnel, skills, and resources: a total force approach, a core force approach, and a hybrid force approach. Robbert et al. (2014) argued that USAF has begun to

5 focus on agile combat support, which is a set of rapidly deployable, non-traditional personnel and equipment that can be used to support operations in various mission areas." The authors also noted that this shift has resulted in a need for a new approach to manning, one that is focused on developing a more agile and responsive personnel system. The authors concluded that the core force approach was the most appropriate for an agile combat support system, as it allows for flexibility and rapid reconfiguration. Tripp et al. (2012) explored the need for an agile combat support system and argued for the development of a new kind of organization. The authors argued that the current system was inadequate due to the limited scalability of the existing organization. The authors proposed a hybrid system, which would involve the use of virtual teams to facilitate a more efficient and effective system. The authors also argued for the use of total-force integration to ensure that the system is flexible and agile. Manning Manpower within organizations is an important factor in ensuring successful operations and outcomes. Manning is the process of determining the number of people and the specialized skills and knowledge required to carry out a specific task. It is an essential component of the military and plays a major role in the effectiveness of a military unit. In the Air Force, manning is a critical component of force structure and a critical success aspect of missions. The American Air Force has long emphasized importance of manning the workforce structure. The importance of manning can be seen in several reports and studies conducted by the RAND Corporation and the Air Force Research Institute. Snyder et al. (2013) study argued that the reorganization improved the Command's ability to function but also highlighted the need for further study on the impacts of the reorganization on the Command's manning. Snyder et al. (2013) furthermore reported that manning levels and skill mix have critical implications for the effectiveness of units (Snyder et al., 2013). Similarly, Robbert et al. (2020) conducted a study examining the Air Force

6 staffing determinants and concluded that effective manning decisions could significantly impact mission readiness (Robbert et al., 2020). Additionally, the importance of manning, the literature also reveals potential gaps in the existing system. Conley et al. (2006) found that the current manning system does not adequately address the need for personnel with specialized skills and knowledge. This can lead to a lack of personnel with the necessary skills and knowledge to complete a mission. Similarly, Sneed and Kilmer (2012) found that the manning system program was inadequate to meet the needs of the workforce. On top of considering the broader context of manpower, it is also important to consider the organizational structure of Air Force organizations. Sneed and Kilmer (2012) conducted a study of the Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) program and found that the current organizational structure is not viable. Newcomer and Connelly (2018) conducted a study of the elements of an effective squadron and identified the importance of having an effective organizational structure in ensuring that the squadron can meet its goals. Iranmanesh et al. (2021) examined the impact of organizational structure on operational performance and concluded that an effective organizational structure is necessary in order to maximize innovation capability. Strategies and Techniques for Ensuring the Success of the Reformation Process With the purpose of ensuring the success of the restructuring process, the USAF has adopted several strategies and techniques. One of the most important strategies is the implementation of the DOD POM cycle budget planning (Larkins, 2021). This budgeting process allows the USAF to evaluate and plan for the cost of the restructuring process to ensure that it is successful. The DOD POM cycle budget planning also provides the USAF with a means to monitor and adjust the budget as needed in order to ensure that the restructuring process is successful. Larkins (2021) emphasizes the need for effective budget planning in order to ensure that resources are allocated to the most important areas.

Your preview ends here

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

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

7 In addition to the DOD POM cycle budget planning, the USAF has also adopted several other strategies and techniques to ensure the restructuring process's success. These include the implementation of the Air Force Manpower Determinants (Robbert et al., 2020), which evaluate the various factors that impact the personnel mix and the organization's efficiency. The Air Force Materiel Command Reorganization Analysis (Snyder et al., 2013) is another strategy employed by the USAF in order to evaluate and improve the efficiency of the materiel command. The USAF has also implemented a number of initiatives in ensuring the success of the reformation process. These include the implementation of the Understrength Air Force Officer Career Fields (Galway et al., 2005), which seeks to identify and address any deficiencies in the personnel mix. In addition, the USAF has implemented the Assessment of the Air Force Materiel Command Reorganization to evaluate the materiel command's efficiency (Conley et al., 2006). Furthermore, the USAF has also implemented the Air Force Transformation (Rolleston, 2005), which seeks to modernize the organization and ensure its readiness for future contingencies. In addition to these studies, numerous other studies have been conducted on the manning issue. Larkins' (2021) study looked at the need for effective workforce planning to ensure that the Air Force could meet its mission. Robert et al (2020) study on the effects of organizational structure on operational effectiveness and provided suggestions for enhancing the process. Conley et al.'s (2006) study suggested the need for more responsive processes to ensure that the Air Force could meet its mission. Notably, it is important to consider the specific manning strategies that are used in Air Force organizations. Rolleston (2005) examined the U.S. Air Force Transformation and identified the need for improved manning strategies to ensure that the USAF can meet its strategic objectives. Guadalupe et al. (2014) conducted a study of the division of labor in top management and concluded that an effective manning strategy is essential in ensuring that the

8 organization can meet goals. Galway et al. (2005) identified the importance of having an effective manning strategy to maximize performance. Savut's (2016) study concluded that an effective manning strategy is necessary to ensure that the organization can meet its objectives. Wood et al. (2008) examined the insights of communal entrepreneurship in Air Force establishments and identified the importance of an effective manning strategy in order to ensure that the organization is able to maximize its performance. Gaps in the Literature The literature on the restructuring of the Minuteman III Systems Directorate is limited in scope, and there are several gaps in the current literature. First, there is a lack of literature on the potential impact of restructuring the organization. While the literature has highlighted the need for restructuring, there has been little research on the possible influence of such a restructure on the mission and performance of the organization. There is notably a scarcity of literature on the potential effects of restructuring on staff. While the necessity for restructuring has been acknowledged in the literature, there has been little research on the potential effects of such restructuring on staff. Furthermore, there is a lack of literature on the potential cost-benefit analysis of restructuring the organization. While the literature has discussed the need for restructuring, there is a lack of research on the potential cost-benefit analysis of such a restructuring. Finally, there is a lack of literature on the potential implications of restructuring the organization on other components of the Air Force. While the literature has discussed the need for restructuring, there is a lack of research on the potential implications of such a restructuring on other components of the Air Force. Conclusion The literature review has examined the existing literature on the restructuring of defence systems, focusing on the Minuteman III system, to identify potential areas for improvement and recommend a restructuring plan for the MMSD. The literature reveals that

9 several studies have examined the restructuring of defence systems, focusing on optimizing their performance and reducing costs. These findings provide valuable insights for the restructuring of the MMSD’s manning, and suggest that an effective manning strategy is essential to ensure that the MMSD can meet its operational aims. Based on the literature, it is recommended that the MMSD focus on restructuring its personnel management system to ensure that personnel is properly trained and qualified to operate the system. Additionally, the MMSD should focus on improving its operations, including implementing new technologies and systems to better prepare for the future. Finally, the MMSD should focus on increasing collaboration and communication among personnel in order to optimize the system's performance.

Your preview ends here

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

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

10 References Conley, R. E., Robbert, A. A., Bolten, J. G., Carrillo, M., & Massey, H. G. (2006). Maintaining the Balance Between Manpower, Skill Levels, and PERSTEMPO (Vol. 492). Rand Corporation. Galway, L. A., Buddin, R. J., Thirtle, M. R., Ellis, P. S., & Mele, J. D. (2005). Understrength Air Force Officer Career Fields. A Force Management Approach . RAND CORP SANTA MONICA CA. Gholz, E., & Sapolsky, H. M. (1999). Restructuring the US defense industry. International security , 24 (3), 5-51. Guadalupe, M., Li, H., & Wulf, J. (2014). Who lives in the C-suite? Organizational structure and the division of labor in top management. Management Science , 60 (4), 824-844. Iranmanesh, M., Kumar, K. M., Foroughi, B., Mavi, R. K., & Min, N. H. (2021). The impacts of organizational structure on operational performance through innovation capability: innovative culture as moderator. Review of Managerial Science , 15 (7), 1885-1911. Larkins, A. (2021). Dod pom cycle budget planning: A complete overview . https://www.decisionlens.com/blog/pom-planning Newcomer, M. J. M., & Connelly, L. C. D. A. (2018). The elements of an effective squadron: An Air Force organizational study. Air & Space Power Journal , 33 , 65-79. Robbert, A. A., Harrington, L. M., Mariano, L. T., Resetar, S. A., Schulker, D., Crown, J. S., ... & Massey, G. (2020). Air Force Manpower Determinants: Options for More- Responsive Processes . RAND Corporation Santa Monica United States. Robbert, A. A., Harrington, L. M., Terry, T. L., & Massey, H. G. (2014). Air Force Manpower Requirements and Component Mix: A Focus on Agile Combat Support . RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE SANTA MONICA CA. Rolleston, M. (2005). Updated Air Force Publication: The US Air Force Transformation. Air & Space Power Journal , 19 (2), 84.

11 Savut, S. (2016). An overview of defense transformation from a manpower and personnel perspective. Journal of Defense Resources Management (JoDRM) , 7 (2), 145-152. Sneed, R. G., & Kilmer, R. A. (2012). The Air Force's individual mobilization augmentee program: is the current organizational structure viable? . AIR UNIV MAXWELL AFB AL AIR FORCE RESEARCH INST. Snyder, D., Fox, B., Lynch, K. F., Conley, R. E., Ausink, J. A., Werber, L., ... & Robbert, A. A. (2013). Assessment of the Air Force Materiel Command Reorganization: Report for Congress . RAND PROJECT AIR FORCE SANTA MONICA CA. Sundberg, Jeffrey P. A case for Air Force reorganization . AIR UNIV MAXWELL AFB AL AIR FORCE RESEARCH INST, 2013. Tripp, R. S., Lynch, K. F., Romano, D. M., Shelton, W., John, A. A., Duran, C. K., ... & Sollinger, J. M. (2012). Air Force Materiel Command Reorganization Analysis: Final Report. RAND Corporation . Wood, C. C., Holt, D. T., Reed, T. S., & Hudgens, B. J. (2008). Perceptions of corporate entrepreneurship in air force organizations: antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship , 21 (1), 117-131.

Order 4939837 RESTRUCTURING PLAN FOR THE MINUTEMAN III SYSTEMS DIRECTORATE

Related Documents