Disruptive solutions process: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 17:47, 28 November 2019

Revision as of 22:41, 14 January 2020

Line 4:

==Overview==

Typical defense industry bureaucratic approach to problem solving involves exquisite, enterprise solutions requiring long lead times, establishment of large, standing teams, and relative inflexibility. The long development cycles and lead times associated with this approach sometimes result in fielding a solution that is no longer relevant.<ref>[https://archive.today/20140503132704/http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/lists/posts/post.aspx?ID=661]{{Dead link|date=November 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> Recent attempts to resolve inefficiencies may include overwhelming with superior funding, resources, and manpower—for example, take any major weapon systems development such as a new fighter jet or IT system.<ref>[http://www.armytimes.com/article/20140403/NEWS/304030061/Lawmakers-scold-DoD-medical-records-failure]</ref> Conversely, when resources are constrained, bureaucratic staff adopt a tactic of continuous process improvement, similar to that espoused in [[Kaizen]], [[total quality management]], and [[Lean Six Sigma]]. This further discourages innovation and perpetuates low value programs and work teams that should be eliminated altogether rather than "improved".

Because most preventable "safety" mishaps are caused by human factors (83% of Fiscal Year 2007 Air Force major mishap costs due to human factors per AF Safety Center)<ref>Catalog of Air Force Statistics by Aircraft Type, considered typical for US Military [http://www.afsc.af.mil/organizations/aviation/aircraftstatistics/index.asp] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081205120401/http://www.afsc.af.mil/organizations/aviation/aircraftstatistics/index.asp |date=December 5, 2008 }}</ref> and can be traced to human cultural and behavioral issues, according to DSP, safety can and should uniquely apply a "disruptive" solution set to addressing the issues. Such a disruptive, iterative approach may not be appropriate in otherwise hardware-centric, large budget programs, such an aircraft procurement and production.