AFCEA SIGNAL Scape

In this month’s Incoming column, Lt. Gen. Harry D. Raduege Jr., USAF (Ret.) poses questions about the nature of CIO positions—their lack of a typical specific qualification list or consistent job description, the trend in CIOs working on management degrees, their lack of strategic decision-making authority. He writes:

Why is the job of chief information officer, especially in the public sector, so difficult? Is it ill-defined, misunderstood, threatening or powerless? Are qualified people assigned, and are salary and compensation levels adequate? These are good questions that represent problems expressed by many chief information officers.

Good questions, to be sure, but the other issues he raises may point to a changing tide in CIO positions as they become more strategy and management focused while remaining technologically fluent. You can read the original article here, but in the meantime, that leads us to this month’s Incoming question:

For as nebulous a job description as the chief information officer seems to have, what qualities and skills does one need to have to be an excellent government sector CIO?

In this month’s Incoming column, Lt. Gen. Harry D. Raduege Jr., USAF (Ret.) talks about how management of data is so important. He looks at it from the enterprise level, discussion trends in how organizations can streamline data management operations through consolidation of data centers:

“It’s all about the data” is a popular expression today. More and more, we’ve come to realize that data is the central building block for protecting, processing, sharing and storing information. And, as government and industry data owners learn to believe in these realities, they quite often decide to establish their own data centers to maintain control. On the surface, this might easily seem like the right thing to do, but it isn’t always the best course to achieve effective consolidation. Being aware of data center consolidation experience and realities can save organizations large sums of money and improve operations.

You can read his entire piece here. But while the trend is interesting to discuss (and we’d welcome your comments on that as well), it brings up another interesting point: Individuals are just as likely to need “data management” skills these days, what with the incredible amount of information that flows through their email in-boxes and feed readers. So, for discussion this month: How much is too much information, and how do you manage it all?

Please share your thoughts in the comments, or discuss it on your blog with a link back to us. We’d love to hear from you!

In “Network Operations Mandate Critical Considerations,” Lt. Gen. Harry D. Raduege Jr., USAF (Ret.) outlines and explains his “pillars of netcentricity,” which are:

1. Communications infrastructure
2. Security, including privacy and cybersecurity
3. Information management
4. Governance
5. Leadership

These pillars are so important, he continues, because as organizations face the challenges of continued streamlining, as resources continue to dwindle even as security demands continue to grow:

Today, many organizations are benefiting from the power of netcentricity and its controlling element—effective NetOps. By the very nature and vulnerability of modern information networks, we know that effective NetOps must be achieved throughout any organization from the corporate office all the way to the tactical edge users. Even with the growing realization of what NCO and NetOps can provide, chief information officers and other information network professionals are being asked to do more with less. The importance of NetOps continues to grow in the face of decreasing manpower and budgets, network consolidations and significant cybersecurity issues, even during wartime.

As a case in point, my son, Lt. Col. Chad Raduege, USAF, is a communications squadron commander in a mainstream Air Force combat unit. Because of increased mission responsibilities amid mandated manpower reductions over the past two years, Col. Raduege has consolidated various NetOps work centers into a more general “event management” operation with specialists trained in multiple disciplines. They provide 24-hour coverage including standby technicians at their homes with a workforce reduced by 35 percent while routinely deploying to and from combat support operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The leadership and management challenges in such a setting are significant. However, successful NetOps are allowing Col. Raduege and others in the public and private sectors to succeed.

But how much added mission, reduced manning and slashed budgets can be sustained? Failure to coordinate governance decisions regarding the five pillars results in capability disconnects and disjointed operational effectiveness. Certainly there is a point of diminished returns where no more expansion and squeezing can be tolerated for effective NCO.

Read the whole column here.

So, with all this in mind, what key elements for effective and efficient network operations pose the greatest challenge for defense agencies?

This month, Lt. Gen. Harry Raduege Jr. examines transition plans—his favorite, in particular, which is the 500-day plan. He discusses his experience using such a plan at CENTCOM and at DISA, and the benefits of doing so over, say, an 18-month plan or the “typical” five-year strategic plan favored by so many organizations:

The CENTCOM 500-day action plan was signed by the commander in chief (CINC), and it directed the components to comply with this plan for transformation. It included a CINC-endorsed vision, mission statement, strategic objectives, individual tasks, names of people responsible and time frames for achieving success. This plan was so successful in delivering improvements through 91 individual programs, projects and tasks that a second plan quickly followed in late 1997 to continue the momentum. Over the years, CENTCOM continued to improve operationally through eight subsequent 500-day action plans. Each built on the progress of previous plans and took into account the changes in the AOR footprint, politics, reorientation, mission and the explosion of information technology capabilities that change the global landscape. The eight successive CENTCOM 500-day action plans-supported by five different four-star combatant commanders-flexibly enabled technology insertion to serve changing operational requirements with the best commercial tools. Together, these plans resulted in 12 years of focused activity that transformed CENTCOM’s command and control capability.

Four years after initiating the first 500-day action plan—which focused on internal improvements at CENTCOM—we found an opportunity at the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) to use this successful methodology. We wanted DISA to become more customer focused by implementing needed improvements throughout the globally dispersed agency. In this application, our 500-day action plan was externally focused to improve DISA’s global customer support with measurable milestones. When it comes to national security, no people or organizations are more important than DISA’s customers: the president, secretary of defense, Joint Chiefs of Staff, combatant commands (COCOMs), military services and defense agencies.

The 500-day planning process was so successful that three subsequent plans were used to transform the way DISA performs as a combat support agency. Along with many customer compliments, perhaps the most impressive endorsement of this methodology came when the Joint Staff conducted interviews with every COCOM and stated its findings in the 2005 Combat Support Agency Review Team report: “DISA Director continued his very successful ‘500-Day action plan’ program where mutually agreed-upon issues are resolved in that period. DISA resolved 134 of 140 issues in the 2002 plan and 107 of 109 issues in its 2004 plan. COCOMs are very supportive of DISA’s 500-day action plan process and its continuance.”

The entire column is here, but we’d enjoy hearing from readers on this subject:

What transition models are working for your agency or organization? How might the 500-day plan work for you?

In this month’s Incoming column, Lt. Gen. Harry Raduege Jr. notes how everyone is going mobile and virtual. He traces how DISA approached the challenges of telework beginning in 2000 in an effort to improve productivity, ease the time and money burden of travel, reduce traffic congestion and boost morale. He notes:

Fortunately, our early experiment developed over time, and DISA now has an award-winning telework program. Today, DISA employees are working from home and also are “forward-deployed” as an advanced echelon to their new headquarters location at Fort Meade, Maryland. Now, DISA employees can telework up to three days a week—60 percent of the work week—with supervisory approval.

Increasingly, DISA is viewing it as a recruitment and retention tool. In many cases, it is more important than pay. More and more, telework is becoming a negotiating chip between organizations and employees. Indeed, the mobile and virtual work force is becoming increasingly pervasive and meaningful in our daily lives.

The entire column is here, but in the meantime, a point for discussion:

What are your thoughts on the drive to create a mobile and virtual work force?

Tech-savvy younger workers from Generation Y are accustomed to easy, speedy access to information. In the not-too-distant future, late Boomers and even Generation X workers will have to adapt to the ways that work force culture is changing as a result of this incoming generation’s influence. This month’s Incoming column examines howrganizations are faced with the challenge to remain relevant, but must do so in a way that makes change a positive asset.

In the column, Lt. Gen. Harry D. Raduege Jr., USAF (Ret.), writes:

In coming years Generation Y will dominate the workplace, and its characteristics will influence and change the culture of the work force. Generation Y is considered a significant attribute to today’s global economy—the most diverse and educated generation to date and generally very accepting of different races and ethnicities. This group enjoys opportunities to be creative, collaborative and innovative, and it seeks exciting and challenging experiences. This work force is naturally competitive but focused on meeting mission goals.

While only at the cusp of the advancing technological era, members of Generation Y are “tech savvy,” expect access to information and want it with speed and accuracy. This generation is not satisfied with the passive attributes of information sharing. Its members proactively obtain information based on their emergent knowledge and solution requirements. Generation Y also leverages technology to create social networks that embrace open communication. Information originates from vast networks and cyber “networks of networks” of people, most of whom will never meet in person.

Our nation’s secret weapon for future success will be the Generation Y work force. We need to learn more about, embrace and benefit from the powerful characteristics of this dynamic emerging generation. Successful leaders will recognize that our future lies with Generation Y, with intergenerational harmonization and by ensuring that an organization’s culture is focused on achieving organizational purpose.

The entire column is here.

So, with that in mind, here’s this month’s question for discussion:

In what ways do today’s leaders and employers need to change organizational culture to merge the best talents of three generations into one diverse but unified workforce?