Incluse abstract (Not part of body word Count)
Review the excerpted passages from: Case Study: Naval Air Station, Barbers Point (Wells, 1996, pg. 99-108).
Case Study: Naval Air Station, Barbers Point
Phase I: Strategic Planning Process
The Naval Air Station Barbers Point (NASBP) has been placed on the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) list. The senior leadership of the command undertook strategic planning to help its people deal with BRAC-related issues. They needed to include closure in their mission, reducing their size and transitioning much of their remaining activity to Marine Corps Base Hawaii at Kaneohe Bay.
“Our closure date is July 99. We’re moving all the operational units and a lot of the air station assets and personnel over to Kaneohe Bay, just across the island. The strategic plan helped focus attention on that and we are well on our way in working toward the move because of it.”
Their goals and objectives reflect their desire to become a model for maintaining the quality and continuity of their service to the operating forces and supporting and improving the quality of life for their personnel while transitioning to closure.
In a 3-day offsite in December 1994, the senior leadership of NASBP developed its mission, vision, guiding principles, and broad goal areas using the DON strategic planning model and guided by a strategic planning facilitation team from the TQL Training Team Pacific. The participants, numbering about 20, were the department heads and special assistants all people with a stake in operating and, ultimately, closing the base.
“The 3-day offsite really got us together as a team and focused our common efforts on what was significant for our organization transitioning to closure.” Following the initial strategic planning offsite, the Base Transition Steering Committee (BTSC) was formed as an Executive Steering Committee to oversee completion and implementation of the plan.
“The transition process for the base had not yet been determined. We didn’t know what was happening with the operational units, whether the air station would close up, whether we would move, or what the timeline was. So a strategic plan to carry us through for who knows how long or for what goals we figured that we’d better wait to finish it until we got the word on what was happening.” The Chiefs Round Table made positive contributions to the completion and further deployment of the strategic plan. “The chiefs took the goals and came up with some great objectives and elements. They really put more action into the plan.”
- The chiefs reviewed, validated, and augmented the strategic plan.
- The chiefs’ buy-in to the plan was obtained.
- The chiefs contributed a work-oriented perspective to the plan.
- The session resulted in team-building within the mid-level management group.
- The chiefs were exposed to TQL processes.
Now that the strategic plan has been completed, plans for communicating it both internally and externally are being developed:
- Department heads will hold formal briefings on the plan for their people.
- The plan will be covered in the command’s General Military Training sessions.
- The Public Affairs Office communication plan will be implemented to disseminate information to station personnel, residents, the chain-of-command, and the community using face-to-face presentations and print and electronic media.
The completed strategic plan is being shared with the base that NASBP is transitioning to at Kaneohe Bay.
Phase II Deployment: Communicating the Strategic Plan
The mission, vision, and guiding principles have been published and communicated to the next level up in the chain-of-command. The goals were recently communicated up the chain-of-command in response to a request for the command’s goals for 1996. Using its strategic plan as the baseline, the BTSC synthesized a list of goals from the plan. “They were able to do that because we have been using our strategic plan as our roadmap to the future. We have our POA&Ms all laid out. Putting together the goals for ‘96 was just a cakewalk for us.”
“One of the major processes we need to complete within the next couple of years is closing down the base and transitioning all the operational activities to the Marine Corps Base Hawaii at Kaneohe Bay.”
A combined relocation team has been established at the senior leadership level. It will meet every week to work through the base closure and transition process. NASBP senior leadership sat in on the Marine Corps strategic planning sessions and is working to coordinate the NASBP plan with the Marine Corps plan. A BRAC Office was opened to get started on the new mission of closing the base.
“The BRAC Office was instrumental in coordinating a number of actions that came out of the strategic plan and that were in the command POA&M. In fact, it was one of the people from the BRAC office who took the individual department POA&Ms and merged them into the command one."
Tailoring the infrastructure has resulted in a reduction in military end strength requirements by 200, or almost one-third of the enlisted workforce. “The process owners all accomplished a lot moving us toward tailoring our infrastructure. We wanted to know what we could downsize to and still support the fleet. The principal strategy used for end-strength reduction has been elimination of redundant functions. “Can we partner with the local weapons magazine to reduce the number of ordnance men we have on station? Can we partner with local supply centers to reduce the number of supply personnel we have on board? If you restructure your aircraft intermediate maintenance department, how many people do you really need?”
Strategies were implemented to reduce the impact on the civilian workforce of tailoring the infrastructure. For example, the new partnership with the local supply center made it possible to eliminate 18 (almost a third) of the civilian positions in the supply department. The workers were placed in other jobs made available by attrition or offered early retirement with a bonus.
“We were able to do that because we developed a plan on how to do it, planned well out into the future, and got everybody working by the plan.”
Without having the strategic plan fully implemented, work on the goals has stayed mostly at the department head level.
“Each individual member of the BTSC was expected to talk to the various people in his or her area of responsibility and, in the interim, work toward the basic goals. The strategic plan directs the chartering of QMBs for initiating and monitoring implementation in the areas of personnel and readiness, base realignment and closure, and quality of life. Membership is currently being defined and identified.
“We are having the various functional areas review their processes and identify where their products and services impact the strategic goals. The BTSC will come back together, collate the inputs, and identify members for the various QMBs.”
Significant accomplishments and the major items being worked on are briefed to the BTSC quarterly. The BTSC periodically reviews the POA&Ms and discusses modifications.
“Every department has had a lot of accomplishments, substantive ones that show we’re doing things more efficiently, with fewer people, doing things that were right for closure and for operating the base at the same time.”
The BTSC periodically reviews accomplishments. While they are not specifically tying metrics to the plan, they see results.
“I haven’t got any measurements on hand that will tell you that our backlogs in maintenance have been reduced. But, even though we’re reducing our maintenance personnel significantly, our backlogs have never been lower. That, I think, is just a result of good plans and good management.”
Evidence that the guiding principles are having an impact:
“Innovation is welcome because of the possibilities for improvement. There is a realization that changes are going to be made and now is the time to look over everything with a view to innovation. People are looking at how we can do things better as we rebuild over at the Marine Corps Base at Kaneohe. The department heads work with each other, looking at the process, trying to come up with better ways of doing things, rather than just individually trying to fix a problem or put out a fire. Since the Round Table, the department heads are working more with the CPOs. There seems to be a good flow of interdepartmental communication. Our legal problems on base have dropped over the past year. The command is holding a quality of life conference.”
The command’s Ohana (Hawaiian for family) Quality of Life Conference is tied in with the guiding principles as well as one of the mission areas: continuing quality of life support even though the base is moving. “We’re going to review all the concerns about quality of life, prioritize what people think are the most important issues for quality of life, and then develop an action plan."
Participants will be delegates from the air station and from all of the tenant commands who are customers. “The delegates will be coming up with the most important quality of life issues. Everybody has a chance to suggest ideas and offer solutions. They are all part of the process. It’s not just a bunch of Captains or Morale Welfare and Recreation Directors saying how we improved quality of life around here; it’s the deckplate level.”
The delegates will separate into focus groups and meet to review inputs received from the extended naval community the military personnel, their family members, retirees, and civilian workers. “This process goes to the deckplate level to find out what they really want, what the families want, what the customers want. It’s not just a town meeting where people are throwing up their individual agenda items; it’s a way for this group to come to consensus on the five highest priority quality of life issues.”
Each focus group will brief the five items most needing improvement in their topic area to the Commander of the Naval Base and the installation commanders. Issues that are Navy-wide will get forwarded to the Chief of Naval Operation’s Quality of Life Panel, but most are expected to be installation-specific.
“When you talk about enhancing quality of life, that is the process. It’s a TQL process. It’s a strategic process. It’s everything rolled into one, and it really works.”
“You need to include people at all levels throughout the command so they feel that they’ve been part of the process and have a stake in the plan; so they will support the plan.”
“We senior leaders are only comfortable getting to the goals in an offsite. We provide the leadership and guidance. We’re mission, vision, and goals people. The CPOs, the mid-level managers they are the doers. They’re the ones to develop the objectives and elements.”
“As you get further down through the tasks and elements developing action plans, it’s important to get input and participation from the people who are going to be implementing the plans. They are the ones who best know their jobs and what’s needed.”
“The Commanding Officer needs to ensure that people are aware that leadership backs the plan and expects people to conduct business in accordance with the plan.”
“Having the mid-level managers (the CPOs) validate our strategic plan and then fully develop the objectives was a powerful process. It helped them gel as a team. It helped them get on board and buy into the mission, vision, and goals.”
“The plan won’t go anywhere unless the process owners are on board with the goals and working as a team to accomplish them. Their leadership is needed to guide the people beneath them. That’s why we call it TQL.”
“The key to success is the linkage between the strategic plan and the existing processes, not having two different organizations, or two ways of managing things, but linking them. For instance, the facilities and environment QMB is linked to the Facilities Planning Board. It’s an existing process that is tailored to accomplish the goals of the plan. If you don’t have that linkage, you may not get buy-in.
“The quality of life conference is a powerful tool. This is the way to go when you’re figuring out prioritizing what customers want for quality of life.”
“Don’t try to force feed the strategic plan. Take it slow and make sure that the right people are in the right place.”
“When everybody in the room feels good about the other guys’ achievements they’re not competing with each other, but proud of their performance as a group then the teamwork just keeps going.”
“When the strategic plan is put on paper, people may treat it as just another flyer. The mission, vision, and goals statements mean a lot to the people who developed them, but may not mean a lot to the people who are reading it. The department heads who communicate on a daily basis with the troops are the ones who will take the strategic plan and make it part of their lives.”
“The reality is, if you don’t have an input into a process, you don’t focus on it. That’s why having the workforce make inputs to the Ohana Quality of Life Conference is so important. You’re getting down to the stuff that really matters to the troops.”
“Implementing the plan would go smoother if more people had a better background in what a strategic plan is all about and why we need to go in that direction.”
“The skipper has emphasized that if we don’t make this plan work for us, we’ve wasted all the effort we put into it. It’s not just to make us look good.”
“You need to ensure that people at all levels who are going to be working the plan have a feedback mechanism to change the plan, if necessary, to make it better.”
We found it crucial to have a trained strategic planning facilitator assist with the strategic planning process. The facilitator provided training in strategic planning, process management, and team skills in addition to guiding the attendees towards completion of a draft plan. Any other command just starting the strategic planning process is strongly advised to use a trained facilitator.”
Wells, D. L. (1996). Case Study: Naval Air Station, Barbers Point. Strategic management for senior leaders: A handbook for implementation (pg. 99-108). Department of the Navy Total Quality Leadership Office. Retrieved, March 26th, 2016, from: http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/initiati/mfr/managebk.pdf
Through research from sources provided in the course and from academic and scholarly resources outside of the course, evaluate and discuss the following elements:
- Evaluate the impact of change processes on stakeholders.
- Analyze if the change processes by the Naval Air Station at Barbers Point were well communicated and did the leadership create effective buy-in strategies for stakeholders?
- As stakeholders are transitioned to other facilities, determine if leadership prepared them as contributors to business and performance excellence at their next duty station or organization?
The paper should contain the following APA formatted elements:
- Title Page.
- Body of the essay (Your researched response).
- References Section.
The requirements below must be met for your paper to be accepted and graded:
- Write a response between 750 words for the body of the essay (The title page, abstract, conclusion and References section are not counted toward the word requirement.) (approximately 4-6¬ pages) using Microsoft Word in APA style.
- Address all three elements fully.
- Use font size 12 and 1” margins.
- Use at least three references from outside the course material (You may use the academic resources included in the Week 8 Bibliography.) one reference must be from EBSCOhost. The course textbook and lectures can be used, but are not counted toward the five reference requirement.
- References must come from sources such as, academic and scholarly journals and essays found in EBSCOhost, CNN, online newspapers such as, The Wall Street Journal, government websites, etc. Sources such as, Wikis, Yahoo Answers, eHow, blogs, etc. are not acceptable for academic writing.
- Cite all reference material (data, dates, graphs, quotes, paraphrased words, values, etc.) in the paper and list on a reference page in APA style. Provide citations everywhere information from the sources is used for foundational support and for validation of opinions.
- Use the third person narrative and avoid the use of the first and second person narrative and terms such as; I, me, myself, you, your, yourself, we or us (or related form such as let’s (let us) or we’ll, we’ve (we will / we have) among others). This will prevent the author or other parties from becoming the subject matter and will maintain the focus of the paper on the central theme and subject matter found in the elements.
- Be informational and avoid being conversational.