RAF Meltdown - Has it begun?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Here, try this for size: Should I enter it for the Plain English competition. Some bits removed deliberately, I managed as far as para 2 and staggered into para 3 before losing my concentration. It may be useful at OASC as a test for would be Admin officers. It has half the readbility of a Dickens' novel and is more complex. Remarkably an insurance policy is actually harder to read.
1. As part of my Ops Business Plan for 2006-07, I set key objectives and targets that are designed to clarify and improve our relationships with both our Customers and Suppliers.
2. One such objective is to undertake a series of Maturity Modelling Exercises across Ops, engaging ** with our Strategic Partners, from across the Delivery Areas of ****** Management, Projects and ****** Management Services. Originally my target was to achieve level 2, in Smart Acquisition terms, by 31 Mar 07.
3. AD Business Management (BM) South, J************ was tasked with writing a paper for my Operations Management Board (OMB) on how best to approach this work.
4. At the OMB on 11 Oct 06, my Management Board agreed to proceed with these exercises using the Supply Chain Relationships In Action (SCRIA) Relationship Evaluation Tool. This was felt to be the most appropriate methodology for the partnerships that we have, and the aspects of partnerships that we wish to measure and develop. This strategic tool was formed in 1995 by the UK Aerospace Small and Medium size Enterprises and Prime Contractors, sponsored by the Society of British Aerospace Companies Ltd., supported by the MoD and part funded by the DTI.
5. The scope of the work will include the Regional Prime Contracts, Integrated Service Providers, Northern Ireland Term Contracts, the Housing Prime Contract, the main FM Contractors for USF, Vanguard and the two Land Management Services Office of Government and Commerce Partners.
6. Staff will recognise the work that has already taken place, in respect of EFQM and Smart Acquisition Maturity Modelling over a number of years both when DE comprised nine Business Units, and now as five Directorates. SCRIA can be seen as aligned to elements of Smart Acquisition, providing a behavioural model focussing specifically on customer-supplier relationships to enable strategy, shared vision, values and culture; enabling people; and enabling leaner support process through openness and trust. EFQM is a general-purpose model of “business excellence”.
7. **** will now be taking this work forward with his BM colleagues, and will be leading on this programme of work across Ops. Engagement and scoping work with the Supplier Relations Group, DPA will commence on 16 Nov 06, and a programme of circa 15 workshops will be setup, with a due completion date of Feb 07, with a report submission to me in March.
8. Areas For Improvement will be identified and managed through a series of Action Plans, embedded across the Delivery Areas and their Strategic Partners.
9. I hope that if asked to participate in the workshops, you will take an opportunity to support what I believe will be a major step towards a better and more credible business platform.
1. As part of my Ops Business Plan for 2006-07, I set key objectives and targets that are designed to clarify and improve our relationships with both our Customers and Suppliers.
2. One such objective is to undertake a series of Maturity Modelling Exercises across Ops, engaging ** with our Strategic Partners, from across the Delivery Areas of ****** Management, Projects and ****** Management Services. Originally my target was to achieve level 2, in Smart Acquisition terms, by 31 Mar 07.
3. AD Business Management (BM) South, J************ was tasked with writing a paper for my Operations Management Board (OMB) on how best to approach this work.
4. At the OMB on 11 Oct 06, my Management Board agreed to proceed with these exercises using the Supply Chain Relationships In Action (SCRIA) Relationship Evaluation Tool. This was felt to be the most appropriate methodology for the partnerships that we have, and the aspects of partnerships that we wish to measure and develop. This strategic tool was formed in 1995 by the UK Aerospace Small and Medium size Enterprises and Prime Contractors, sponsored by the Society of British Aerospace Companies Ltd., supported by the MoD and part funded by the DTI.
5. The scope of the work will include the Regional Prime Contracts, Integrated Service Providers, Northern Ireland Term Contracts, the Housing Prime Contract, the main FM Contractors for USF, Vanguard and the two Land Management Services Office of Government and Commerce Partners.
6. Staff will recognise the work that has already taken place, in respect of EFQM and Smart Acquisition Maturity Modelling over a number of years both when DE comprised nine Business Units, and now as five Directorates. SCRIA can be seen as aligned to elements of Smart Acquisition, providing a behavioural model focussing specifically on customer-supplier relationships to enable strategy, shared vision, values and culture; enabling people; and enabling leaner support process through openness and trust. EFQM is a general-purpose model of “business excellence”.
7. **** will now be taking this work forward with his BM colleagues, and will be leading on this programme of work across Ops. Engagement and scoping work with the Supplier Relations Group, DPA will commence on 16 Nov 06, and a programme of circa 15 workshops will be setup, with a due completion date of Feb 07, with a report submission to me in March.
8. Areas For Improvement will be identified and managed through a series of Action Plans, embedded across the Delivery Areas and their Strategic Partners.
9. I hope that if asked to participate in the workshops, you will take an opportunity to support what I believe will be a major step towards a better and more credible business platform.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: england
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The RAF is now being run as a business; employing basic and often crude business methods to reduce wastage, without regard for the type of work done or the effect on manning for any other reasons. (Chug – That’s what LEAN is about)
A bit like founding your current man-power on 1990’s weekend working times and conditions.
What remains is a force that can do the very tip of its former capability.
QUOTE]As part of my Ops Business Plan for 2006-07[/QUOTE]
Right - I will stop you there Sir. What do you mean Ops Business Plan? Since when did HM Forces become a business? Has there been a shares issue - if so where's my dividend? And more importantly, can the shareholders have a vote of no confidence in the Board??? Hmmmm thought not.
When are the Top Brass going to grow a spine and tell the bean counters to get back in their boxes?
When will the bean counters realise that HM Forces (not Gordon's or Tony's) do not deal in tangible assets and concepts of profit or loss? The whole country profits when families can sleep safely in their beds at night knowing they aren't going to be invaded or blown up. Contrary to popular opinion at MOD and the Treasury, profit and loss is not measured by the number of assets on each station and how much they are worth. Profit and loss as far as I am concerned is all about lives and operations: when I go on ops, do I achieve my mission and do I bring the same numbers of troops home that I took out at the start of the op? When I call the roll, if everyone answers and the job has been done, then that's all I care about.
As soon as the bean counters took over, that's when the RAF started to go down hill. Sir Jock - you want to save some money .... how about firing the management consultants and accountants that cost millions yet keep telling you we are skint and have to flog another Sqn, Regt or destroyer or 3 to pay their fees!
Right - I will stop you there Sir. What do you mean Ops Business Plan? Since when did HM Forces become a business? Has there been a shares issue - if so where's my dividend? And more importantly, can the shareholders have a vote of no confidence in the Board??? Hmmmm thought not.
When are the Top Brass going to grow a spine and tell the bean counters to get back in their boxes?
When will the bean counters realise that HM Forces (not Gordon's or Tony's) do not deal in tangible assets and concepts of profit or loss? The whole country profits when families can sleep safely in their beds at night knowing they aren't going to be invaded or blown up. Contrary to popular opinion at MOD and the Treasury, profit and loss is not measured by the number of assets on each station and how much they are worth. Profit and loss as far as I am concerned is all about lives and operations: when I go on ops, do I achieve my mission and do I bring the same numbers of troops home that I took out at the start of the op? When I call the roll, if everyone answers and the job has been done, then that's all I care about.
As soon as the bean counters took over, that's when the RAF started to go down hill. Sir Jock - you want to save some money .... how about firing the management consultants and accountants that cost millions yet keep telling you we are skint and have to flog another Sqn, Regt or destroyer or 3 to pay their fees!
Last edited by Melchett01; 12th Dec 2006 at 23:12.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lampeter
Age: 63
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right - I will stop you there Sir. What do you mean Ops Business Plan? Since when did HM Forces become a business? Has there been a shares issue - if so where's my dividend? And more importantly, can the shareholders have a vote of no confidence in the Board??? Hmmmm thought not.
When are the Top Brass going to grow a spine and tell the bean counters to get back in their boxes?
When will the bean counters realise that HM Forces (not Gordon's or Tony's) do not deal in tangible assets and concepts of profit or loss? The whole country profits when families can sleep safely in their beds at night knowing they aren't going to be invaded or blown up. Contrary to popular opinion at MOD and the Treasury, profit and loss is not measured by the number of assets on each station and how much they are worth. Profit and loss as far as I am concerned is all about lives and operations: when I go on ops, do I achieve my mission and do I bring the same numbers of troops home that I took out at the start of the op? When I call the roll, if everyone answers and the job has been done, then that's all I care about.
As soon as the bean counters took over, that's when the RAF started to go down hill. Sir Jock - you want to save some money .... how about firing the management consultants and accountants that cost millions yet keep telling you we are skint and have to flog another Sqn, Regt or destroyer or 3 to pay their fees![/QUOTE]
well said
. They have finally worn me down after 26 years service. PVR submitted 18 Oct 06 
When are the Top Brass going to grow a spine and tell the bean counters to get back in their boxes?
When will the bean counters realise that HM Forces (not Gordon's or Tony's) do not deal in tangible assets and concepts of profit or loss? The whole country profits when families can sleep safely in their beds at night knowing they aren't going to be invaded or blown up. Contrary to popular opinion at MOD and the Treasury, profit and loss is not measured by the number of assets on each station and how much they are worth. Profit and loss as far as I am concerned is all about lives and operations: when I go on ops, do I achieve my mission and do I bring the same numbers of troops home that I took out at the start of the op? When I call the roll, if everyone answers and the job has been done, then that's all I care about.
As soon as the bean counters took over, that's when the RAF started to go down hill. Sir Jock - you want to save some money .... how about firing the management consultants and accountants that cost millions yet keep telling you we are skint and have to flog another Sqn, Regt or destroyer or 3 to pay their fees![/QUOTE]
well said
. They have finally worn me down after 26 years service. PVR submitted 18 Oct 06
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congratulations on reaching paragraph 3, Pontius. I was contemplating dangling myself from the light fitments by the 2nd sentence of paragraph 2.
Pray tell: Would the author qualify as one of my 2nd rate Civil Service and Military Leaders seeking alleged cure-alls for their own inadequacy?
Anyway, we're missing a trick here. With the combined wit of PPRuNe, surely we should be drawing up the next generation ISO LEAN (No, Isolean - sounds Greek and therefore must be scientific!). Now, Personnel is too self-explanatory, Human Resources is so 90s. By Jingo, I have it:
Pray tell: Would the author qualify as one of my 2nd rate Civil Service and Military Leaders seeking alleged cure-alls for their own inadequacy?
Anyway, we're missing a trick here. With the combined wit of PPRuNe, surely we should be drawing up the next generation ISO LEAN (No, Isolean - sounds Greek and therefore must be scientific!). Now, Personnel is too self-explanatory, Human Resources is so 90s. By Jingo, I have it:
Isolean Anthrocapital Development.
Shall we see if PPRuNe can develop a (barely) plausible management fad and market it as the cure-all for their own inadequacy to the chimps in MoD?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Flatlands
Age: 60
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006570573,00.html
You know things are bad when even the current bun is jumping on the bandwagon.
You know things are bad when even the current bun is jumping on the bandwagon.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Flatlands
Age: 60
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770
And more. The right wing press now fully on the case.
And more. The right wing press now fully on the case.
LOL!
"Isolean Anthrocapital Development."
An T,
Please start your Patent application now, and don't forget to go for the .com addresses too.
I can see the headlines now...
IAD bites at the Ankles of Wall St" - The Pink 'Un.
"MOD reverberates to IAD" - True Blue Times
"IADicalisation rules" - New Biz-Speak monthly.
"IAD.com Best Web-site ever" - PC User
"Waht?" - Translations Cost Manager.
"Isolean Anthrocapital Development."
An T,
Please start your Patent application now, and don't forget to go for the .com addresses too.
I can see the headlines now...
IAD bites at the Ankles of Wall St" - The Pink 'Un.
"MOD reverberates to IAD" - True Blue Times
"IADicalisation rules" - New Biz-Speak monthly.
"IAD.com Best Web-site ever" - PC User
"Waht?" - Translations Cost Manager.
Last edited by Rigga; 13th Dec 2006 at 12:14. Reason: spllin
If anyone in power in the RAF truly cares about its immediate future, they must attend to lancing this boil now. Waiting for a change of Government, CAS, or their own retirement will be too late. Sort this now or go down with the ship. Meltdown has begun!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
You might think that but I could not possibly comment except to say that they speak of the author is hushed and reverent terms. A 2* equivalent CS even.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I think he might be trying to say, is there's adrive to improve process using CMMI style techniques.
If so, he'd do better to get on with it rather than write about it.
Whatever happened to good management went out the window. Sadly, I bumped into an old pal in MOD recently - someone you and I both know - who is utterly despondent of such actions. Understandably so.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read the MOD Annual report from the Defence Committee here:
http://www.parliament.the-stationery...ence/57/57.pdf
It's an 80 page PDF, so for the deployed borrowing Uncle Sam's hardware for 15 minutes per sitting, here's the summary:
This report analyses the Ministry of Defence’s Annual Report and Accounts 2005–06 which combines the Annual Performance Report and the consolidated Departmental Resource Accounts.
The MoD’s assessment is that it is on course to achieve its Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets which run until March 2008.
The Annual Report describes military operations undertaken in 2005–06, but the MoD has refused us the information on which it bases its assessment that these operations are on course for success. Future MoD Annual Performance Reports should provide clear performance criteria.
The MoD’s performance against its PSA target for generating forces has deteriorated, which is understandable given the level of operational deployments. The readiness targets should be made more challenging in the longer term. The reliability of air transport and the shortage of serviceable battlefield helicopters should be addressed.
The MoD has broadly achieved its manning requirement for the Armed Forces but this is because the manning targets have fallen. It needs to revise its Defence Planning Assumptions to take into account the increased level of operational activity. The Armed Forces continue to experience difficulties in the recruitment and retention of personnel although the outflow figures provide no evidence of an exodus. The MoD has introduced financial incentives to improve retention in certain trades, but significant shortages of personnel remain in some areas. The Armed Forces are operating in challenging conditions and without all the equipment they need. The current level of commitments is impacting on training. With problems of undermanning continuing, there is a clear danger that the Armed Forces will not be capable of maintaining current commitments over the medium-term.
The MoD’s performance against its diversity targets is poor. The Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force, in particular, have failed to recruit sufficient people from ethnic minorities. Progress has been made in the number of women joining the Services but there are alarming levels of recorded sexual harassment.
The MoD met its procurement targets. The merger of the Defence Procurement Agency and the Defence Logistics Organisation will shift focus onto through-life support of equipment, and the PSA targets should reflect this.
The MoD’s performance against its value for money targets is good. It has exceeded its efficiency savings targets but should continue to improve the way efficiency savings are measured.
The MoD is rationalising the number of Defence Agencies. The Committee would be concerned if this reflected a wider centralist tendency or led to less transparency in the MoD’s work.
New and potential losses reported in the MoD’s Resource Accounts totalled some £143 million in 2005–06, a lower figure than the previous year. The MoD should continue to make improvements in the way it records and reports losses.
Standby for briefings about our excellent value for money from the highly paid help - questions will not be allowed during this briefing etc.
Aye
http://www.parliament.the-stationery...ence/57/57.pdf
It's an 80 page PDF, so for the deployed borrowing Uncle Sam's hardware for 15 minutes per sitting, here's the summary:
This report analyses the Ministry of Defence’s Annual Report and Accounts 2005–06 which combines the Annual Performance Report and the consolidated Departmental Resource Accounts.
The MoD’s assessment is that it is on course to achieve its Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets which run until March 2008.
The Annual Report describes military operations undertaken in 2005–06, but the MoD has refused us the information on which it bases its assessment that these operations are on course for success. Future MoD Annual Performance Reports should provide clear performance criteria.
The MoD’s performance against its PSA target for generating forces has deteriorated, which is understandable given the level of operational deployments. The readiness targets should be made more challenging in the longer term. The reliability of air transport and the shortage of serviceable battlefield helicopters should be addressed.
The MoD has broadly achieved its manning requirement for the Armed Forces but this is because the manning targets have fallen. It needs to revise its Defence Planning Assumptions to take into account the increased level of operational activity. The Armed Forces continue to experience difficulties in the recruitment and retention of personnel although the outflow figures provide no evidence of an exodus. The MoD has introduced financial incentives to improve retention in certain trades, but significant shortages of personnel remain in some areas. The Armed Forces are operating in challenging conditions and without all the equipment they need. The current level of commitments is impacting on training. With problems of undermanning continuing, there is a clear danger that the Armed Forces will not be capable of maintaining current commitments over the medium-term.
The MoD’s performance against its diversity targets is poor. The Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force, in particular, have failed to recruit sufficient people from ethnic minorities. Progress has been made in the number of women joining the Services but there are alarming levels of recorded sexual harassment.
The MoD met its procurement targets. The merger of the Defence Procurement Agency and the Defence Logistics Organisation will shift focus onto through-life support of equipment, and the PSA targets should reflect this.
The MoD’s performance against its value for money targets is good. It has exceeded its efficiency savings targets but should continue to improve the way efficiency savings are measured.
The MoD is rationalising the number of Defence Agencies. The Committee would be concerned if this reflected a wider centralist tendency or led to less transparency in the MoD’s work.
New and potential losses reported in the MoD’s Resource Accounts totalled some £143 million in 2005–06, a lower figure than the previous year. The MoD should continue to make improvements in the way it records and reports losses.
Standby for briefings about our excellent value for money from the highly paid help - questions will not be allowed during this briefing etc.
Aye
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
At the risk of sounding like the party line, if you're under-recruiting in significant portions of society, you are unlikely to be getting the best people to fill the slots you've got. I think targetted advertising/recruitment pushes are perfectly reasonable...
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in my combat underpants
Age: 53
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rats. Ship. Any more words anyone?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In a field far far away...
Age: 51
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was going to suggest "sinking" but then realised that under Navy drawdown the ship has been retired from service and has spent the last eighteen months in dry dock, so it's unlikely to be doing anything water related...
At the risk of being poo-pooed, I do not see the relevance of a great many of the preceding posts. Would they not be better suited to a thread entitled "rib-tickling gobbledygook"? Unless of course it is a serious contention that RAF meltdown is the result of bad writing!
If indeed meltdown has begun it would surely be the result of a fundamental flaw in the construct of the existing body. Even the rates at which people might be leaving, or for that matter joining, would surely be a consequence of that flaw, rather than a cause in their own right. It would perhaps be more profitable to identify the flaw(s) rather than demonstrate our cleverness in writing appraisal?
Down everyone, incoming!
If indeed meltdown has begun it would surely be the result of a fundamental flaw in the construct of the existing body. Even the rates at which people might be leaving, or for that matter joining, would surely be a consequence of that flaw, rather than a cause in their own right. It would perhaps be more profitable to identify the flaw(s) rather than demonstrate our cleverness in writing appraisal?
Down everyone, incoming!