The name of the acquisition game is empowerment and accountability.

• Author: Church, Dale

Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition Frank Kendall's "better buying power" initiatives deserve applause, but it is also important to examine the root cause of many of the problems in the defense acquisition system.

Simply, it is the lack of empowerment and accountability. The Pentagon must return to the basic management principle of placing the most qualified people in charge, empower them with the authority to execute, and then hold them accountable for their performance.

It is imperative that the defense acquisition system deliver the best goods and services to the nation's military forces more efficiently, particularly as the defense budget is reduced. The current system is way too complex to achieve this goal. This complexity causes significant waste for programs that are terminated or cannot be executed within their cost and schedule baselines.

A recent study by the Defense Business Board is correct in stating that the defense acquisition system--comprised of the three stovepipes of requirements, acquisition and budgets--is "too complex, too bureaucratic, too paper-laden, too lengthy and costly while disconnected and uncoordinated in both initiation and execution."

The system has grown through legislation and internal reforms in response to specific problems. Attempts to solve them have resulted in multiple layers of laws and regulations. These many additions without subtractions have added reports and reviews to the process while failing to focus on the need to let individual managers and senior leadership drive the process and be accountable. There are just too many offices that have to be satisfied as a part of system decision reviews. Major milestones currently require more than 60 documents and other requirements to be completed. This encumbrance is way beyond necessary and the norms of good management, and often loses sight of the overall goal to ensure the effective use of taxpayer dollars.

The additional reports and reviews just add more time to the process and overhead costs. Some of the initiatives have caused offices to be created in the bureaucracy just to complete the reporting requirements without being integrated in the process. These reports and reviews would be totally unnecessary if the managers and senior leaders were empowered to make decisions within their portfolios and held accountable.

Under this complex system, everyone is "in charge" but, in reality, no one is. Many of the best professionals are thwarted...