GAO renews call for Defense management chief
Department officials argue that such a position would be redundant, but watchdog agency says it is necessary to provide accountability.
The Defense Department's reluctance to establish a chief management officer position does not serve the interests of taxpayers, Government Accountability Office officials argue in a new report.
The report (GAO-07-1072) written by Sharon Pickup, GAO's director of defense capabilities and management, called on Congress to enact legislation to establish such a position. The executive filling the job would serve a term of five to seven years and focus exclusively on management and business transformation.
The Pentagon has thus far resisted, claiming that a deputy secretary already serves in a de facto management chief role and adding another official at the undersecretary level would create unnecessary confusion and redundancy.
"Ultimately, a person at the right level, with the right type of experience, in a full-time position with a term appointment, and with the proper amount of responsibility, authority and accountability is needed to lead the effort," Pickup wrote. "Contrary to DoD's view, we believe the establishment of a separate CMO position would bring leadership, accountability, focus, and direction to the department's efforts rather than creating dysfunctional competition and causing confusion."
The House and Senate Armed Services committees introduced authorization bills earlier this year that include language requiring the Defense Department to provide greater leadership over its business transformation initiative.
Both bills, however, stop short of calling on the department to establish a management chief slot. The Senate bill (S. 1547) would establish a full-time position of undersecretary of Defense for management -- essentially a deputy chief management officer. The House bill (H.R. 1585) would provide Secretary of Defense Robert Gates with greater flexibility in structuring his management team.
The chambers have not yet worked out the differences with their legislation.
The dispute between GAO and Defense dates back several years.
In 2005, GAO added Defense's approach to business transformation to its high-risk list, claiming that the department's improvement efforts were fragmented and lacked an integrated business transformation plan. The watchdog agency argued that a management chief was needed to turn the effort around.
The new report, released to various congressional committees last week, reiterated many of those same points. The document charged that while Defense has made progress establishing a management structure that focuses on modernizing the business systems, it has failed to address many broader issues.
GAO found that a lack of clearly defined roles and responsibilities, along with a dearth of accountability at the highest levels of the department, have stunted the agency's progress.
"DoD's business area weaknesses result in inadequate accountability to Congress and the American people, wasting billions of dollars each year at a time when DoD is competing for resources in an increasingly fiscally constrained environment," the report noted.
The report did credit Pentagon leaders for a handful of recent initiatives that have the potential to improve the department's business operations.
The agency has set up a Defense Business Systems Management Committee to review and approve funds for the transformation project, created investment review boards to provide additional management and financial oversight, and established the Business Transformation Agency to help coordinate the effort.
Despite these positive steps, Defense's efforts have failed to expand beyond systems modernization, GAO said.
"Until DoD's business transformation management framework is institutionalized and encompasses broad responsibilities for all aspects of business transformation, it will be challenging for DoD to integrate related initiatives into a sustainable, enterprisewide approach and to successfully resolve weaknesses in business operations that we have shown are at high risk of waste, fraud and abuse," the report found.
Paul Brinkley, deputy undersecretary of defense for business transformation, said the department is on the right track.
"Business systems modernization is a critical step in achieving overall Defense business transformation," Brinkley wrote in a response to the report. "The lessons learned and new governance structures developed through the modernization of the department's business systems acquisition process are already being evaluated for implementation beyond the business side of the department."