NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and interim vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
This is a report of work supported by Contract DAAK60-95-C-2069 between the U.S. Army Soldier Systems Command, Acquisition Directorate, and the National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-0-5978-X
Limited copies are available from:
Board on Army Science and Technology
National Research Council
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20418
Additional copies are available from:
National Academy Press
Box 285
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20055
800/624-6242 202/334-3313 (in the Washington Metropolitan Area)
Copyright 1997 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
Standing Committee on Program and Technical Review of the U.S. Army Natick Research, Development and Engineering Center
JOSEPH F. SOUKUP (chair),
Science Applications International Corporation, McLean, Virginia
DONALD L. ZINK (vice chair),
Nestle USA, Glendale, California
BISHNU S. ATAL,
AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, New Jersey
HAROLD R. BOOHER, Senior Executive Service (retired),
Baltimore, Maryland
ARNOLD E. DENTON,
Campbell Soup Company (retired), Moorestown, New Jersey
PHILIP EBERT,
DuPont Company (retired), Wilmington, Delaware
CHRISTINE HAILEY,
Utah State University, Logan
RICHARD M. HODGETTS,
Florida International University, Miami
FRANK K. KO,
Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
PARRY M. NORLING,
DuPont Central Research and Development, Wilmington, Delaware
ALAN B. PERKINS,
MITRE Corporation, Huntsville, Alabama
JANICE A. PHILLIPS,
Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Board on Army Science and Technology Liaison
ROBERT J. HEASTON,
Guidance and Control Information Analysis Center (retired), Naperville, Illinois
Board on Army Science and Technology Staff
BRUCE A. BRAUN, Director
MICHAEL A. CLARKE, Study Director
NORMAN M. HALLER, Consultant
JACQUELINE A. CAMPBELL-JOHNSON, Senior Project Assistant
DEBORAH RANDALL, Project Assistant (until March 1997)
DELPHINE D. GLAZE, Administrative Assistant (since May 1997)
U.S. Army Liaisons
ROBERT W. LEWIS,
U.S. Army Soldier Systems Command, Natick, Massachusetts
PHILIP BRANDLER,
U.S. Army Natick Research, Development and Engineering Center, Natick, Massachusetts
PETER F. DECOSTA,
U.S. Army Natick Research, Development and Engineering Center, Natick, Massachusetts
Board on Army Science and Technology
CHRISTOPHER C. GREEN (chair),
General Motors Corporation, Warren, Michigan
WILLIAM H. FORSTER, (vice chair)
Northrop Grumman Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland
ROBERT A. BEAUDET,
University of Southern California, Los Angeles
GARY L. BORMAN,
University of Wisconsin, Madison
LAWRENCE J. DELANEY, consultant,
Potomac, Maryland
MARYE ANNE FOX,
University of Texas, Austin
ROBERT J. HEASTON,
Guidance and Control Information Analysis Center (retired), Naperville, Illinois
KATHRYN V. LOGAN,
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
THOMAS L. McNAUGHER,
The Arroyo Center, RAND Corporation, Washington, D.C.
NORMAN F. PARKER,
Varian Associates (retired), Cardiff by the Sea, California
STEWART D. PERSONICK,
Bell Communications Research, Incorporated, Morristown, New Jersey
M. "FRANK" ROSE,
Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama
HARVEY W. SCHADLER,
General Electric Corporation (retired), Schenectady, New York
CLARENCE G. THORNTON,
Army Research Laboratories (retired), Colts Neck, New Jersey
JOHN D. VENABLES,
Venables & Associates, Towson, Maryland
ALLEN C. WARD,
Ward Synthesis, Incorporated, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Staff
BRUCE A. BRAUN, Director
ALVERA V. GIRCYS, Financial Associate
MARGO L. FRANCESCO, Administrative Associate
PAMELA LEWIS, Project Assistant
Preface
This report is the second in a two-phase response to a request from the technical director of the U.S. Army Natick1 Research, Development and Engineering Center (RDEC) that the National Research Council (NRC) assess the RDEC relative to its vision of being a world-class organization. The NRC committee I had the pleasure to chair provided the basis for this report in the phase-one NRC report, World-Class Research and Development, which was published in September 1996. That report defined the characteristics of a world-class research, development, and engineering organization and the metrics by which an Army RDEC could be assessed. In this second phase of the study, we used those characteristics and their associated metrics to assist us in assessing the Natick RDEC. The results of that assessment are contained in this report.
During the assessment we addressed a wide range of issues, related not only to the Natick RDEC's goal of performing at a world-class level but also to subjects related to the command structure within which the RDEC operates. We are hopeful that this assessment will contribute to the RDEC's ability to confront and resolve complex issues, maintain progress toward reaching its goal, and continue its valuable contributions to our nation's defense, despite the many external pressures currently affecting all U.S. Department of Defense organizations.
In addition, we hope that other Army RDECs and similar organizations within the U.S. Department of Defense or elsewhere will find the results of our assessment valuable, particularly as they demonstrate the application of the characteristics and metrics of world-class organizations. The Natick RDEC's willingness to subject itself to public evaluation speaks volumes about its commitment to excellence. We want this commitment to be recognized, and we hope that other organizations will also benefit from our evaluation.
The committee members included experts in the assessment of research, development, and engineering organizations, as well as in the products and technologies at the RDEC. However, we could not have completed our work without
the splendid cooperation of the many dedicated personnel at Natick who did their best to explain the intricacies of their operations to us and answer our many questions.
Finally, the committee and I want to recognize the contribution of the NRC staff members who worked so hard to assist us in bringing this study to a successful conclusion.
JOSEPH SOUKUP, CHAIR
STANDING COMMITTEE ON PROGRAM AND TECHNICAL REVIEW OF THE U.S. ARMY NATICK RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND ENGINEERING CENTER
Figures, Tables, and Boxes
Figures
ES-1 |
The major components of world-class research and development organizations |
|||
ES-2 |
The five pillars and 25 characteristics |
|||
ES-3 |
Spider diagram for the commodity directorates |
|||
1-1 |
The major components of world-class research and development organizations |
|||
1-2 |
The five pillars and 25 characteristics |
|||
1-3 |
Relationship of Soldier Systems Command (and the Natick RDEC) to the Army Materiel Command |
|||
1-4 |
Internal organization of the Natick RDEC |
|||
1-5 |
Organization of the Mobility Directorate |
|||
1-6 |
Organization of the Survivability Directorate |
|||
1-7 |
Organization of the Sustainability Directorate |
|||
1-8 |
Organization of the support directorates |
|||
2-1 |
Spider diagram for the commodity directorates |
Tables
1-1 |
Ten Key Issues Addressed by the Committee in Stage 2 of the Assessment |
|||
1-2 |
Major Technical Features of the Directorates of the Natick RDEC |
|||
2-1 |
Resources and Capabilities Pillar |
|||
2-2 |
Strategic Vision Pillar |
|||
2-3 |
Quality Focus Pillar |
|||
2-4 |
Customer Focus Pillar |
|||
2-5 |
Value Creation Pillar |
|||
3-1 |
Summary of STD Assessment |
|||
3-2 |
Summary of ASCD Assessment |
|||
4-1 |
Ten Key Issues Addressed by the Committee in Stage 2 of the Assessment |
Acronyms
ASCD
Advanced Systems Concepts Directorate
DOD
U.S. Department of Defense
MobD
Mobility Directorate
NRC
National Research Council
STD
Science and Technology Directorate
SurD
Survivability Directorate
SusD
Sustainability Directorate
R&D
research and development
RD&E
research, development, and engineering
RDEC
research, development, and engineering center